a lexicalist approach to the syntactico-functional ...€¦ · a lexicalist approach to the...
TRANSCRIPT
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
t
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variation
of Polish Noun PhrasesBeata TrawinskiUniversity of Tübingen
BASEES Conference 2005
April 2-4, 2005, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, UK
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.1
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tAdverbial Noun Pheases (AdvNPs)
Apart from adjectives, adverbs and relative and adverbialclauses, many languages use bare noun phrases for thepurpose of modification (cf. the English and Germanexamples).
(1) a. I will visit you next week .
b. Do it that way .
(2) a. IchI
besuchevisit
dichyou
nächstenext
Woche.week
‘I will visit you next week.’
b. Erhe
hathas
denthe
ganzenwhole
Wegway
geschlafen.slept
‘He slept the whole way.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.2
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tAdvNPs in Polish
Adverbial noun phrases (AdvNPs) have particularly high frequency and a widespectrum of uses in inflectional languages such as Polish.
According to (Szober 1969) and (Urbanczyk 1978), among others
genitive,
dative,
accusative and
instrumental
NPs are possible in the adverbial function in Polish.
Exemplary denotations of Polish AdvNPs:
temporal relations (expressed by genitive and accusative AdvNPs);
possessors, benefactors (denoted by dative AdvNPs);
measure (specified by accusative AdvNPs);
there are particularly many semantic uses associated with instrumental AdvNPsand especially with relational instrumentals which necessarily take genitivecomplements, such as
celem ‘for the purpose of’,droga ‘by way of’,kosztem ‘at the expense of’,wzgledem ‘because of’, etc.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.3
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tGenitive, Dative and Accusative AdvNPs
(3) a. JanJan
odjechałleft
ostatniejlastgen
nocy.nightgen
‘Jan left last night.’ (time)
b. MariaMaria
wypiładrank
koledzecolleaguedat
piwo.beer
‘Maria drank colleague’s beer.’ (possessor)
c. JanJan
zauwazyłnoticed
MarieMary
metrmeteracc
przedin front of
soba.him
‘Jan noticed Mary one meter in front of him.’ (measure)
d. MariaMaria
płakałacried
caławholeacc
godzine.houracc
‘Maria was crying for a whole hour.’ (time)
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.4
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tInstrumental AdvNPs
(4) a. PiotrPiotr
uciekłescaped
lasem.forestinstr
‘Piotr escaped through the forest.’ (space)
b. JanJan
czytareads
wieczorem.eveninginstr
‘Jan reads in the evening.’ (time)
c. MariaMaria
zabiłakilled
pajakaspider
gazeta.newspaperinstr
‘Maria killed the spider with a newspaper.’ (means)
d. PiotrPiotr
odszedłwent
wolnym krokiem.slowinstr stepinst
‘Piotr went slowly.’ (manner)
e. JanJan
wyjechałleft
celem odpoczynku.purposeinstr recreationgen
‘Jan left for the purpose of recreation.’ (goal)
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.5
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe Problem for Grammatical Theory
In syntactic contexts such as those above, NPs such as theitalicized NPs clearly act as adjuncts, although, they are notprototypical modifiers. Typically, they are used in syntacticstructures as subjects and objects.
The variation between the syntactic function of subject/objectand the syntactic function of adjunct indicates two differentsets of syntactic and especially semantic properties:
While adverbial NPs (AdvNPs) are assumed to act assemantic functors, as all modifiers do, non-adverbial NPs areusually considered as semantic arguments.
The question: How to capture these two sets of featuresproperly in grammatical theory?
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.6
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tLicensing AdvNPs and Non-Adverbial NPsThere are several possibilities to treat NPs showing syntactico-functionalvariation in the grammar:
One could assume two lexical entries providing appropriate featuresfor each genitive, dative, accusative and instrumental noun that canappear both in adverbial and non-adverbial context. The problem:
This strategy would lead to redundancies in the lexicon.
Depending on formal foundations of the grammar frameworkassumed one could
define appropriate lexical rules deriving AdvNPs fromnon-adverbial NPs or vice versa or
provide appropriate lexical constaints licensing AdvNPs andnon-adverbial NPs.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.7
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tHPSG of (Pollard and Sag 1994)
In this paper we will attempt to treat the subject/object–adjunctvariation of Polish NPs within the framework of Head-Driven PhraseStructure Grammar in the tradition of (Pollard and Sag 1994).
Advantages of HPSG: HPSG is a
comprehensive (it is possible to encode generalizations aboutall linguistic representation levels simultaneously, therebyaccounting for a possible interaction between the particularlevels),
lexicalist (it offers the possibility to determine the properties ofboth words and phrases on the word level),
fully formalized (cf. (Richter 2000)),
computer-applicable
linguistic formalism.
Crucial property of HPSG: It is a non-derivational constraint-basedgrammar framework.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.8
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tObjectivesOur objectives are:
on the empirical level � �
To find out what syntactic and semantic propertiesAdvNPs share with the non-adverbial NPs and – basedon these observations –
on the theoretical level � �To provide a strictly lexicalist constraint-based treatmentof NPs which non-redundantly describes both theiradverbial and non-adverbial usages and captures thesyntactic, lexico-semantic as well as combinatorialproperties of adverbial and non-adverbial NPs.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.9
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tOverview
Empirical generalizations
We will give a short overview of morphological cases in Polishand say which cases can mark adverbial NPs.
We will examine a number of AdvNP with respect to variouslinguistic phenomena in order to find out how the AdvNPs differfrom non-adverbial NPs and to what extend they share syntacticand semantic properties with them.
The Analysis
Lexical licensing: Based on the empirical generalizations, wewill provide a lexical constraint for licensing AdvNPs andnon-adverbial NPs.
Structural licensing: We will demonstrate how AdvNPs arestructurally licensed within the standard HPSG framework ofPollard and Sag (1994).
We will sum up the discussion.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.10
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tMorphological Cases in Polish
There are seven morphological cases in contemporary Polish:
nominative,
genitive,
dative,
accusative,
instrumental,
locative and
vocative.
The nominative case is mainly used on subjects and predicativecomplements.
The locative case appears not freely, but only as a prepositionalobject.
The vocative case has a special, non-sentential status.
The genitive, dative, accusative and instrumental cases can beassigned to both argument NPs and adverbial NPs.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.11
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tMorphological Cases in Polish: Examples
non-adverbial NPs AdvNPs
nominative � Jan spi.Jan is_sleeping
‘Jan is sleeping.
� none
genitive � Maria zazadała pieniedzy .Maria demanded money
‘Maria demanded the money.’
� Jan odjechał tej nocy .Jan left this night
‘Jan left that night.’
dative � Piotr dedykował swój doktorat rodzicom.Piotr dedicated his thesis parents
‘Piotr dedicated his thesis to his parents.’
� Maria wypiła Janowi piwo.Maria drank John beer
‘Maria drank John’s beer.’
accusative � Jan zobaczył Marie.Jan saw Maria
‘Jan saw Maria.’
� Maria płakała cała godzine.Maria was crying whole hour
‘Maria was crying for a whole hour.’
instrumental � Jan posłuzył sie nozem.Jan used RM knife
‘Jan used a knife.’
� Piotr uciekł lasem.Piotr escaped forest
‘Piotr escaped through the forest.’
locative � Jan jest teraz w szkole.Jan is now in school
‘Jan is in school now.’
� none
vocative � Mamo, poczekaj!mama wait
‘Wait, mama!’
� none
� � How the two uses of genitive, dative, accusative and instrumental NPs should be captured by the grammar?
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.12
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tPrevious Approaches to AdvNPs
Transformational approaches focus particularly on the aspects of case assignment toAdvNPs:
(Emonds 1976), (Bresnan and Grimshaw 1978) and (McCawley 1988) treat AdvNPsas being embedded in a PP headed by a null preposition assigning case to those NPs.(Larson 1985) assumes that AdvNPs are bare NPs. However, since they are notgoverned by a case marking element, (Larson 1985) proposes the featurespecification
�� � �
for nouns heading adverbial NPs. In the case a NP cannot bestructurally case marked (because it does not appear in a position governed by acase marking element), it is assigned its case from the case assigning featurespecification
�� � �
.(Jaworska 1986) suggests a possibility that AdvNPs in English have no case at all,since they never show any morphological variation, nor do they have any otherproperties that might be related to case.For Polish data (Jaworska 1986) assumes a specification of the form
�
CASE � INST
�
,�
CASE � GEN
�
, and
�
CASE � ACC
�
in the lexical entry of each noun that can head anadverbial NP (no statement about the dative case). This strategy, however, leads toredundancies in the lexicon.
The constraint-based approach of (Kasper 1997) discusses mainly combinatorial aspects ofmodifying and non-modifying NPs.
In our approach an analysis of NPs will be offered which captures their syntactic,lexico-semantic as well as combinatorial properties.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.13
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tEmpirical Investigations
In order to make appropriate generalizations about thedistribution of Polish NPs in adverbial contexts, we willexamine a range of AdvNPs with respect to
determination and quantification,
modification,
pluralization and
referentiality.
The objective is to specify a set of syntactic and sematicproperties that AdvNPs share with ordinary, non-adverbialNPs, and to determine properties that AdvNPs provide incontrast to ordinary NPs.
We will focus exclusively on AdvNPs that modify VPs, leavingAdvNPs modifying NPs for a future work.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.14
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tDetermination and Quantification
In Polish, in contrast to English or German,there is no obligatory determination andquantification. NPs can occur in a sentence in abare form. However, they are permitted tocombine with determiners and quantifiers.
We will examine the ability of AdvNPs to selecta determiner and a quantifier in order to find outwhether they behave analogically tonon-adverbial NPs in this respect.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.15
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tDetermination and Quantification: Examples
(5) a. JanJohn
odjechałleft
*(tej/pewnej)this/some
nocy.night
genitive
‘John left that/some night.’
b. MariaMary
wypiładrank
(temu/jakiemus/kazdemu)this/some/every
koledzecolleague
piwo.beer
dative
‘Mary drank this/some/every colleague’s beer.’
c. MariaMary
uczyłastudied
sieRM
(te/kazda)this/every
godzinehour
wat
domu.home
accusative
‘Mary studied for that/every hour at home.’
d. PiotrPeter
uciekłescaped
(tym/jakims)this/some
lasem.forest
instrumental
‘Peter escaped through this/some forest.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.16
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tDetermination and Quantification: Observations
AdvNPs can occur both as bare NPs as well as incombination with determiners and quantifiers, andin this respect they behave like non-adverbial NPs.Only genitive AdvNPs show a behavior which issomewhat atypical for Polish NPs, not onlypermitting but requiring a determiner or a quantifier.In fact, genitive AdvNPs in Polish do not necessarilyrequire a determiner or a quantifier. The presenceof a modifier, such as nastepny ‘next’ or pół ‘half’,will also ensure the grammaticality of the sentence(cf. (Szober 1969) and (Jaworska 1986)).
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.17
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tAdjectival/Participial Modification
We will examine whether AdvNPs can be modifiedby adjectives and adjectival participles, as arenon-adverbial NPs.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.18
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tAdjectival/Participial Modification: Examples
(6) a. JanJohn
odjechałleft
*(ostatniej/minionej)last/past
nocy.night
genitive
‘John left last/past night.’
b. MariaMary
wypiładrank
(niemieckiemu/spragnionemu)German/thirsty
koledzecolleague
piwo.beer
dative
‘Mary drank the German/thirsty colleague’s beer.’
c. MariaMary
uczyłastudied
sieRM
(cała/miniona)whole/past
godzinehour
wat
domu.home
accusative
‘Mary studied for the whole/past hour at home.’
d. PiotrPeter
uciekłescaped
(gestym/ciemnym)dense/dark
lasem.forest
instrumental
‘Peter escaped through the dense/dark forest.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.19
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tAdjectival/Participial Modification: Observations
Genitive, dative, accusative and instrumental AdvNPs all allowadjectival and participial modification and that they behave liketypical NPs in this respect. As already mentioned, genitive AdvNPsrequire a determiner or quantifier and/or a modifier.
(Jaworska 1986) claims that accusative AdvNPs, similar to genitiveAdvNPs, must contain modifiers, such as cały ‘whole’. However,examples such as those below show that this requirement does nothold.
(7) a. MariaMary
pracowaławorked
godzine.houracc
‘Mary worked for an hour.’
b. PiotrPeter
przebywałstayed
miesiacmonthinstr
win
szpitalu.hospital
‘Peter stayed in a hospital for a month.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.20
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tPluralization
If no formal and/or lexico-semantic restrictions arepresent, nouns can be pluralized in anstraightforward way. Below we will test whether thisholds for AdvNPs as well.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.21
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tPluralization: Examples
(8) a. *JanJan
odjechałleft
ostatnichlast
nocy.nights
genitive
b. MariaMary
wypiładrank
kolegomcolleagues
piwo.beer
dative
‘Mary drank the colleagues’ beer.’
c. MariaMary
uczyłastudied
sieRM
całewhole
godzinyhours
wat
domu.home
accusative
‘Mary studied for entire hours at home.’
d. PiotrPeter
uciekałescaped
lasami.forests
instrumental
‘Peter escaped through forests.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.22
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tPluralization: Observations
Dative, accusative and instrumental AdvNPscan occur in plural form.
In contrast, the occurrence of genitive pluralAdvNPs seems to be either very restricted inPolish or not possible at all (to our knowledge,there are no detailed studies on this issue sofar).
The ungrammaticality of sentences with genitiveplural AdvNPs can possibly be explained by theincompatibility of the semantic contribution of theadverbial genitive NPs themself, as a point in time, andthe semantics of plural.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.23
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tReferentiality
We will investigate AdvNPs with regard toreferentiality.
As an indication for referentiality, we willconsider the ability of a NP to control pronouns.
The ability of AdvNPs to control relative andpersonal pronouns will be tested.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.24
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tControl of Relative Pronouns
(9) a. JanJohn
odjechałleft
tejthis
nocy ,night
której �
whichprzybyłaarrived
Maria.Mary
genitive
‘John left the night that Mary arrived.’
b. MariaMary
wypiładrank
piwobeer
koledze � ,colleague
którego �
whomnienot
lubi.likes
dative
‘Mary drank the beer of the colleague whom she does not like.’
c. MariaMary
płakałacried
godzine � ,hour
która �
whichwydawałaseemed
sieRM
nienot
miechave
konca.end
acc
‘Mary was crying for an hour, which seemed not to end.’
d. PiotrPeter
uciekłescaped
lasem � ,forest
który �which
dobrzewell
znał.knew
instrumental
‘Peter escaped through the forest which he knew well.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.25
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tControl of Relative Pronouns: Observations
Genitive, dative, accusative and instrumentalAdvNPs are capable of controlling relative pronounsintroducing relative clauses. This fact indicates thatAdvNPs are referential.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.26
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tControl of Personal Pronouns: Examples
(10) a. JanJohn
odjechałleft
tejthis
nocy � .night
Byławas
ona �
itciemnadark
iand
deszczowa.rainy
gen
‘John left this night. It was dark and rainy.’
b. MariaMary
wypiładrank
koledze �
colleaguepiwo.beer
Dlategothat’s_why
byłwas
on �he
zły.angry
dat
‘Mary drank the colleague’s beer. That’s why he was angry.’
c. MariaMary
płakałacried
godzine � .hour
Wydawałaseemed
sieRM
ona �
itnienot
miechave
konca.end
acc
‘Mary was crying for an hour. It seemed not to end.’
d. PiotrPeter
uciekłescaped
lasem � .forest
Znałknew
go �
itdobrze.well
instr
‘Peter escaped through the forest. He knew it well.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.27
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tControl of Personal Pronouns: Observations
Genitive, dative, accusative and instrumentalAdvNPs are capable of controlling personalpronouns. This fact confirms the assumption thatAdvNPs are referential.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.28
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tSummary of Empirical Investigations
determination/quantification modification pluralization control
genitive dative accusative
instrumental
Except for genitive AdvNPs, which always seem to require adeterminer, a quantifier or an adjective, all other AdvNPs can occurboth as bare NPs and NPs containing determiners, quantifiers andadjectives, and do not differ in this respect from non-adverbial NPs.
All examined AdvNPs can appear in the plural form.
Every AdvNP can control pronouns.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.29
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tEmpirical Generalizations
AdvNPs share their syntactic features withnon-adverbial NPs.
Since AdvNPs can act as controllers as theirnon-adverbial counterparts do, they arereferential objects.
The crucial difference between adverbial andnon-adverbial NPs seems to relate to theirselectional and lexico-semantic properties.
� � The next step will be the formalization of the empirical generalizationswithin the HPSG grammar framework.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.30
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tHPSG Descriptions: An Outline
According to the HPSG paradigm in the tradition of(Pollard and Sag 1994) linguistic objects are sets of
phonological,
morphological,
syntactic,
semantic and
pragmatic
information modeled by feature structures.
Feature structures are, generally speaking,representations of idealized linguistic objects and are(amongh others) described by AVMs (attribute-valuematrices).
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.31
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tAn AVM Description of Linguistic Signs according to (Pollard and Sag 1994)
��������������������������������������������
PHONOLOGY phonological structure
SYNSEM
����������������������������
LOCAL
����������������������
CATEGORY
������
HEAD part of speach, etc.
VAL/SUBCAT valence
������
CONTENT semantic structure
CONTEXT pragmatic information
����������������������
NONLOCAL non-local dependencies (extraction)
����������������������������
DAUGHTERS constituent structure
��������������������������������������������
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.32
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe AVM Description of the Pronoun she
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
word
PHON
!
she
"
SYNSEM
�#������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
synsem
LOCAL
�������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������$
local
CATEGORY
�%�������������$
category
HEAD
�& noun
CASE nom
'&(
SUBCAT
)*'%+�+�+�+�+�+�+$(
CONTENT
���������������������������$
ppro
INDEX
,�%�����������$
ref
PER 3rd
NUM sing
GEND fem
'%+�+�+�+�+�+$(RESTR
-.
'�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+$(
CONTEXT
�����������������$
context
BACKGR/102030203054&02050302036�%�������$
psoa
RELN female
INST
,'%+�+�+�+$(7 02030203058&02050302039
'�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+$('�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+$(
NONLOCAL
�#���������������������������������$ nonlocal
TO-BIND
�������$ SLASH
-.
REL
- .
QUE
- .'�+�+�+$(
INHERITED
�%�����$
SLASH
-.
REL
- .
QUE
- .'%+�+�+$(
'#+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+$('#+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�(
QSTORE
-.
'�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�+�(
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.33
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe AVM Description of the Verb sings
:;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;?>
word
PHON
@
sings
A
SYNSEM
:;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;B;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;C>
synsem
LOCAL
:;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;B;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;?>
local
CATEGORY
:;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;?>
category
HEAD
:>verb
VFORM fin
DE
SUBCAT
FHG
LOCAL
I
CONTENT
IINDEX
, J KD
L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L?E
CONTENT
:>RELATION sing
SINGER
,D
ECONTEXT context
DL<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<LBL=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L?E
NONLOCAL
:;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;?>
nonlocal
TO-BIND:
;<;C>SLASH
MNREL
M NQUE
M ND
L<LCE
INHERITED
:;<;C>
SLASH
M N
REL
M N
QUE
M ND
L<LCED
L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L?E
DL<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<LBL=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<LCE
DL<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L?E
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.34
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe AVM Description of a Phrase She sings
OQP5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P3R
phrase
PHON
)
she, sings
*
SYNSEM
OQP3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2PSR
synsem
LOCAL
OQP3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2PSR
local
CATEGORY
OQP3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2PSR
category
HEAD
, OQPSRverb
VFORM fin
TQUSV
SUBCAT
) *TQU3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2USV
CONTENT
W OQP3P3P2PSRRELATION sing
SINGER
X TQU3U3U2USVTQU3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2USV
NONLOCAL nonlocal
TQU3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2USVDTRS
OQP5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P5R
head-comp-struc
HEAD-DTR
OQP3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P5R
phrase
PHON
)
sings
*
SYNSEM
OBP2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P5RLOCAL
OQP3P2P5P3P2P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P5R
CATEGORY
OBP2P3P3P2P3P5P2P5RHEAD
,
SUBCAT
YZ [TBU2U3U3U2U3U5U2U5V
CONTENT
WTQU3U2U5U3U2U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U5VTBU2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U5V
DTRS
OQP3P5P2P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P5R
head-comp-struc
HEAD-DTR
OQP5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P5R
word
PHON
)
sings
*SYNSEM
O<P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P2P5P3RLOCAL
OQP3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P2P3P5P3RCATEGORY
OBP2P3P5P2P3P3P2PSRHEAD
,
SUBCAT
YZ [TBU2U3U5U2U3U3U2USV
CONTENT
WTQU3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U2U3U5U3VT<U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U2U5U3V
TQU5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U5V
COMP-DTR
) *
TQU3U5U2U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U5VTQU3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U5V
COMP-DTRS
YOBP2P3P3P2P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5P2P5R
word
PHON
)she
*
SYNSEM
Z OQP3P2P3P5P2P3P3P2P3P3P2PSRLOCAL
OQP3P3P2P5P3P2P3P3P2P3P5R
CATEGORY
OQP3P5P3RHEAD noun
SUBCAT
) * TQU3U5U3V
CONTENT
OBR
index
X TBVTQU3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5VTQU3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2USV
TBU2U3U3U2U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U5V[
TQU5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U5VTQU5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U2U3U3U2U3U5U2U3U3U2U3U3U2U5U3U3V
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.35
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe Tree Structure of the Phrase She sings
\^]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H`
word
PHON
)
she
*
SYNSEM
Z\^]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]_`LOCAL
\^]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]_`
CATEGORY
\a]_`HEAD noun
SUBCAT
) * bac_d
CONTENT
e
INDEX
X fb^cHcHcHc_cHcHcHc_db^cHcHcHc_cHcHcHc_d
b^cHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHd\a]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]g`
word
PHON
)
sings
*
SYNSEM
\a]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]g`LOCAL
\a]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]g`
CATEGORY
\a]H]H]_]H]g`HEAD
,
SUBCAT
h Z ibacHcHc_cHcgd
CONTENT
WbacHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcgdbacHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcgd
bacHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcgd
H
\^]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H`
phrase
PHON
)
sings
*SYNSEM
\^]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]_`LOCAL
\^]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]_`CATEGORY
\^]H]H]_]H]H`HEAD
,
SUBCAT
h Z ib^cHcHc_cHcHd
CONTENT
Wb^cHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHc_db^cHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHc_d
b^cHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHdC H
\^]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]j]H]H]H]g`
phrase
PHON
)
she, sings
*
SYNSEM
\^]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H`
synsem
LOCAL
\a]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]g`
local
CATEGORY
\^]H]H]_]H]H]H]H]_`
category
HEAD
, \k`verb
VFORM fin
bkd
SUBCAT
) *b^cHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_d
CONTENT
W \a]H]g`RELATION sing
SINGER
X bacHcgdbac_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHcgd
b^cHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHdb^cHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cHcHcHcHc_cjcHcHcHcgd
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.36
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tDescription of Modifiers according to Pollard and Sag (1994)
According to the standard HPSG approach of (Pollard and Sag 1994), adjuncts aretreated as both syntactic and semantic selectors.
The selection proceeds via the MOD feature appropriate for all objects of type noun.
While the MOD feature’s value of adjuncts is of sort synsem, the MOD feature ofnon-adjuncts is valued as none.
��������������������
word
SYNS
������������
LOC
������������
CAT
l
HEAD
l
MOD
��synsem
LOCl
CONT
m�
�
CONT
l
RESTRn�o
NUCL
lARG
m p q�
������������
������������
�������������������
����������
word
SYNS�
�LOC
oCAT
l
HEAD
l
MOD none
p
CONT content
��
����������
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.37
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe Underspecified Lexical Entry for Nouns
As shown above, Polish genitive, dative, accusative, and instrumental NPs can occurboth as adjuncts and as non-adjuncts, thus, the grammar must license nouns with thesynsem-valued MOD attribute as well as nouns with the none-valued MOD attribute.
Instead of specifying two separate lexical entries for each noun, we postulate onelexical entry for each noun with underspecified information about the MOD value andpartially underspecified information about the CONTENT value.
����������������������������������
word
SYNS
����������������������������
LOC
��������������������������
CAT
o
HEAD noun
pCONT
������������������
nom-obj
INDEX
mRESTR
r%s�ts�u
v�
���NUCL
��INST
m
...
��
���� , ...
w s�xs�y
������������������
��������������������������
����������������������������
����������������������������������
We provide then an implicational lexical constraint containing each lexical entry as itsantecedent and a disjunctive consequence ensuring the licensing of adverbial andnon-adverbial nouns.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.38
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tLexical Constraint for Licensing Adverbial and Non-Adverbial Nouns
z , z Z
{|Q|Q|1|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|1|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|1|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|}|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|1|Q~
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<�
word
SS
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�<�
LOC
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�<�
CAT
�
HEAD noun
�
CONT
��Q�1�Q�Q�<�
INDEX
,
RESTR
���j��j�
Z�
�<�NUCL
�� INST
,
...
��
��<� , ...
� �j��j�
��Q�1�Q�Q�<�
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�<�
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�<�
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<�
� �{
|Q|Q|1|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|1|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|1|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|}|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|Q|1~�
�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�<�
word
SS
��}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�B�
LOC
��}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�B�
CAT
I
HEAD
I
MOD: none
CONT
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<�
INDEX
,RESTR
���j���j�j�j��j�j�j�j�j�
Z�
�Q�Q�Q�<�NUCL
��Q�Q�<�
INST
,
...
ARG
��
�Q�Q�<��
�Q�Q�Q�<� , ...
� �j���j�j�j��j�j�j�j�j�
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<�
��}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�B�
��}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�B�
��Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�<�
�
��Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�B�
word
SS
��Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<�
LOC
��Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<�
CAT
��Q�Q�Q�1�Q�<�
HEAD
��Q�Q�Q�1�<�
CASE gen
�
dat
�
acc
�
instr
MOD:
��B�LOC
I
CONT
��B� INDEX
W
RESTR
X�
�B��
�B��
�Q�Q�Q�1�<��
�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�<�
CONT
��Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�
INDEX
,
RESTR
���j�j�j�j�j��j�j�j�j�j�
Z�
�Q�Q�Q�<�NUCL
��Q�Q�Q�<�
INST
,
...
ARG
W�
�Q�Q�Q�<��
�Q�Q�Q�<� , ...
� �j�j�j�j�j��j�j�j�j�j�
� X�
�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q��
�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<��
�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�<��
�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�B��
�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1��
�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�}�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�Q�1�Q�
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.39
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tExplanation
According to the above principle, MOD values of the two disjuncts in the consequencebecome specified. While the MOD value of the first disjunct is specified as none (forlicensing non-adverbial nouns), the MOD value of the second disjunct is a synsemobject (for licensing adverbial nouns).
Since both adverbial and non-adverbial NPs are able to bind pronouns, we assumeboth to be nominal objects containing an index.
The psoa object in the RESTR set of the non-adverbial nouns differs from psoa objectin the RESTR set of the adverbial nouns. While the relation associated withnon-adverbial nouns does not introduce any additional arguments, the relationassociated with adverbial nouns introduces an argument whose value is identified withthe INDEX value of the modified VP. This reflects the intuition that adverbial nouns incontrast to non-adverbial nouns act as semantic functors. The value of the RESTR
feature of an adverbial noun is a union of its own RESTR set and the RESTR set of themodified VP.
This analysis will presuppose a sort hierarchy for semantic relations associated withnouns of the following form.
relation1 ... relation2 ARG index ...
relation INST index
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.40
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe HPSG Approach to Modification by (Kasper 1997)
(Kasper 1997) shows that the standard treatment ofmodification does not correctly handle modifiers thatcontain embedded modifiers and he provides a theory ofmodification that enables to represent the commonmeaning shared by different uses of the same expressionas a modifier and a non-modifier.
For nouns such as day in English, which can act ascomplements, as well as modifiers in syntactic structures,he provides a special lexical entry.
(11) a. Kim enjoyed the day before yesterday .
b. Kim left the day before yesterday .
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.41
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe Lexical Entry fot day according to (Kasper 1997)
:;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;B;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;?>
PHON
@
day
A
HEAD
:;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;=;<;<;=;<;C>
noun
PRD �
MOD
:;<;<;=;<;=;?>
ARG
:>
�
V
CONT
X I
LOCATION
WD
E
ICONT
I
INDEX
W
ECONT
X
DL<L<L=L<L=L?E
DL=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<LCE
CONT
:;<;=;<;<;=;?>
nom-obj
INDEX
,
RESTR
:>RELN day
INST
,D
ED
L<L=L<L<L=L?ESPR
@
DetP
A
DL=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=LBL<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L<L<L=L<L=L?E
The value of the MOD feature contains the feature ARG, which takes synsem as its value, thefeature ICONT (internal content), which takes as its value the CONTENT value of the modifier’smaximal projection, and the feature ECONT (external content), whose value is the semanticresult of the functor-argument combination. The CONT attribute represents the inherentcontent that is specified for the lexical item.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.42
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tProblems with the Approach of (Kasper 1997)
The essential idea of the proposal of (Kasper 1997) is todistinguish the inherent meaning of a word or phrasefrom its uses in different constructions.
In this theory the CONT attribute of a sign contains onlyits inherent semantic contribution. According to thisapproach, the CONT value of adverbial and non-adverbialnouns remains the same.
This assumption seems to be not quite consistent withthe intuition about the lexical meaning of nouns used astime, place, measure or manner specifications versusthose used to denote things or objects. This intuitionseems to be supported by the following data:
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.43
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tLexico-Semantic Restrictions(12) a. Maria
Maryobejrzaławatched
(cały)whole
godzinny/one-hour/
czarno-biały/black_and_white/
polski/Polish/
panoramiczny/wide-screen/
pełnometrazowyfeature
film.film
‘Mary watched a (whole) one-hour/ black and white/ Polish/ wide-screen/ feature film.’
b. MariaMary
płakałacried
*(cały)whole
godzinny/one-hour/
�
czarno-biały/black_and_white/
�
polski/Polish/
�
panoramiczny/wide-screen/�
pełnometrazowyfeature
film.film
‘Mary was crying the whole one-hour /
�
black and white /�
Polish /
�wide-screen /
�
feature film.’
(13) a. JanJohn
uszkodziłdemaged
asfaltowa/asphalt/
�
meczacaexhausting
droge.road
‘John damaged an asphalt/
�
exhausting road.’
b. JanJan
spałslept
caławhole
tathis
�
asfaltowa/asphalt/
meczacaexhausting
droge.road
‘John was sleeping the whole
�asphalt/ exhausting trip.’
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.44
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tGeneralizations about Semantic Relations
The (un)acceptability of the sentences above seems torelate to the (in)compatibility of lexical meaningscontributed by the adjectives and the nouns.
Adverbial nouns introduce a different lexico-semanticmeaning to their non-adverbial counterparts.
Thus, unlike (Kasper 1997), who does not consider theselexical ambiguities, we find it reasonable to assumedifferent semantic relations for adverbial andnon-adverbial uses of a given noun, that is not to haveone fix CONTENT value for each use of a given noun.
� � Given the Lexical Constraint for Licensing Adverbial and non-Adverbial NPs phrasalstructures containing AdvNPs can be licensed.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.45
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tThe Structure of the VP odjechał ostatniej nocy (‘left last night’)
��������}���}�}�������}���}�}�������}���}�}�
PHON
�
odjechał
SYNS
,�
�}�������}�}���}�������}�}���}�¡�Q�
LOC
��}�¡�}���}���}�}�¡�}���}���}�}�}�
CAT
��Q�HEAD
¢
verb
VAL | SUBJ
�
NP X £
¤Q¥
CONT
��}���}�}�¡�}�1�
INDEX
Z
RESTR
W¦�§�§�§¨§�©
§�§¨§�§�ª�
�}���1�NUCL
��}�}�
leave
INST
Z
LEAVER
X£
¤}¤}¥£
¤}¤�¤1¥« §�§�§¨§�¬
§�§¨§�§�£
¤}¤�¤}¤}¤¡¤}¤1¥£
¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤}¥£
¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤Q¥£
¤�¤�¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¥�
�}���}���}�}�¡�}���}���}�}�¡�}���}���}�}�¡�}���}���}�}�¡�}���}���}�}�}�
PHON
�
ostatniej, nocy
SYNS
��¡�}���}�}���}�¡�}���}�}���}�¡�}���}�}���}�¡�}���}�}���}�¡�}�1�
LOC
��}�}���}���}�¡�}�}���}���}�¡�}�}���}���}�¡�}�}���}���}�¡�}�Q�
CAT
��}�¡�}���}�Q�HEAD
��}�¡�}���}�Q�
nounCASE gen
MOD:
, ��}�LOC | CONT
�� INDEX
Z
RESTR
W£
¥£
¤}¥£
¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤Q¥£
¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤Q¥
CONT
��}�������}�}���}�������}�}���1�
INDEX
®
RESTR
¯°
±�±�±}±�±}±}±¡±}±�±}±�²¦³§¨§�§¨§�§¨§�§�§�§�§¨©
§�§�§¨§�§�§�§�§¨§�§�ª�
�}�}�}�NUCL
��}�}�
night
INST
®
ARG
Z£
¤}¤}¥£
¤}¤}¤}¥ ,
��NUCL
´
last
ARG
®µ £¥
« §¨§�§¨§�§¨§�§�§�§�§¨¬§�§�§¨§�§�§�§�§¨§�§�
� W¶
·�·�·}·�·}·}·¡·}·�·}·�¸£
¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤}¤�¤1¥£
¤}¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤Q¥£
¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤}¤¡¤}¤1¥£
¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤¡¤}¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤}¥
H A
��}���}�}�������}���}�}���1�
PHON
�
odjechał, ostatniej, nocy
SYNS | LOC
����}���}�}�����1�
CAT
��}�HEAD
¢
VAL | SUBJ
�
NP X £
¤}¥
CONT
��INDEX
Z
RESTR
¯£
¥£
¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤�¤1¥£
¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤�¤�¤}¤�¤}¤}¤�¤1¥
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.46
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tExplanation to the Tree Structure
The genitive noun nocy ‘night’ is licensed by the Lexical Constraintfor Licensing Adverbial and Non-Adverbial Nouns.
By virtue of the restrictions on adverbial genitive nouns, the nounnocy ‘night’ combines with the adjective ostatniej ‘last’.
The genitive NP modifies the verb odjechał ‘left’ via the feature MOD
in the way proposed in (Pollard and Sag 1994).
According to the SEMANTICS PRINCIPLE, the INDEX value of theentire VP odjechał ostatniej nocy ‘left last night’ is token-identicalwith the INDEX value of the head daughter, that is of the verb, andthe RESTR value of the VP is token-identical with the REST value ofthe adjunct daughter, that is of the AdvNP.
The HEAD-FEATURE PRINCIPLE and the HEAD-ADJUNCT SCHEMA
ensure the percolation of the head and subcategorization informationalong the structure.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.47
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
tSummary and Outlook
We have discussed various aspects of the licensing of Polish AdvNPs in the HPSGgrammar framework.
Based on the results of applying a range of syntactic and semantic tests to PolishAdvNPs, we have made the generalization that AdvNPs share syntactic features andthe property of referentiality with non-adverbial NPs but differ from them in selectionalproperties.
Based on empirical generalizations, an underspecification-based lexical implicationalprinciple for licensing adverbial and non-adverbial nouns has been formulated.
By virtue of the provided constraint, both adverbial and non-adverbial NPs can belicensed without defining multiple lexical entries for nouns, introducing lexical rules orextending the standard HPSG geometry.
The analysis captures syntactic, lexico-semantic and combinatorial properties of NPs.
Outlook:
The above investigations focused on syntactic and compositional-semanticaspects of the AdvNP grammar leaving lexico-semantic factors untouched.However, an additional lexico-semantic treatment of AdvNPs will be needed toexclude overlicensing.
The developed NP grammar fragment should be implemented using a systemfor implementig HPSG-style grammars.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.48
EB
ER
HA
RD
KA
RL
SU
NIV
ER
SIT
ÄTT
ÜB
ING
EN
Sem
inar
fürS
prac
hwis
sens
chaf
t
ReferencesBresnan, J. W. and J. Grimshaw (1978). The Syntax of Free Relatives in English. Linguistic Inquiry 9,
331–391.
Emonds, J. E. (1976). A Transformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure-preserving, andLocal Transformations. Academic Press.
Jaworska, E. (1986). Aspects of the Syntax of Prepositions and Prepositional Phrases in English andPolish. Ph. D. thesis, University of Oxford.
Kasper, R. (1997). Semantics of Recursive Modification. Manuscript, version of October 29, 1997.
Larson, R. K. (1985). Bare NP-Adverbs. Linguistic Inquiry 16, 595–621.
McCawley, J. D. (1988). Adverbial NPs: Bare or Clad in See-Through Garb? Language 64, 583–590.
Pollard, C. J. and I. A. Sag (1994). Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago: The University ofChicago Press.
Richter, F. (2000). A Mathematical Formalism for Linguistic Theories with an Application in Head-DrivenPhrase Structure Grammar. PhD thesis, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, Version of April28th, 2000.
Szober, S. (1969). Gramatyka jezyka polskiego [The Grammar of Polish]. Warszawa: PWN.
Urbanczyk, S. (1978). Encyklopedia wiedzy o jezyku polskim [Encyclopedia of the Knowledge of PolishLanguage]. Wrocław, Warszawa, Kraków, Gdansk: Wydawnictwo Zakładu Narodowego im.Ossolonskich.
A Lexicalist Approachto the Syntactico-Functional Variationof Polish Noun Phrases – p.49