extraposition from np heike walker georg-august university of göttingen cogeti workshop heidelberg...

ExtrapositionExtraposition from NPfrom NP

Heike WalkerHeike Walker

Georg-August University of Georg-August University of GöttingenGöttingen

CoGETI Workshop CoGETI Workshop HeidelbergHeidelberg

24-25 November 200624-25 November 2006

2

OverviewOverview

1.1. Definition and DataDefinition and Data

2.2. Syntactic AnalysesSyntactic Analyses

3.3. HPSG AnalysesHPSG Analyses

4.4. Discourse ConstraintsDiscourse Constraints

5.5. ConclusionConclusion

3






4

DefinitionDefinition

ExtrapositionExtraposition: a p: a process by which an rocess by which an element element

is moved to theis moved to the right of, or subsequent right of, or subsequent to, its to, its

canonicalcanonical positionposition..

Extraposition from NPExtraposition from NP: a process by : a process by which which

an element is extraposed from an NP.an element is extraposed from an NP.

5

Categorial restrictionsCategorial restrictions

PP-ExtrapositionPP-Extraposition(1)(1) A man appeared A man appeared with green eyeswith green eyes..(2)(2) I don‘t see much argument myself any longer I don‘t see much argument myself any longer

against differential rentsagainst differential rents.. (Keller 1995)(Keller 1995)

Relative Clause ExtrapositionRelative Clause Extraposition(3)(3) A book appeared A book appeared which was written by which was written by

Chomsky. Chomsky. (Baltin 2001)(Baltin 2001)

Sentential complementsSentential complements(4)(4) Mary mentioned the claim yesterday Mary mentioned the claim yesterday that that

John is intelligentJohn is intelligent. . (Kiss 2002)(Kiss 2002)

6

The Position of The Position of Attachment of the Attachment of the Extraposed PhraseExtraposed Phrase

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

- Phrase extraposed from Phrase extraposed from objectobject attached attached to to VPVP

- Phrase extraposed from Phrase extraposed from subjectsubject attached to attached to VP or IP VP or IP (Culicover&Rochemont 1990)(Culicover&Rochemont 1990)

7

Upward boundednessUpward boundedness

(5)(5) *It was believed [*It was believed [S S that John saw a picture _that John saw a picture _ii in the in the newspaper by everyone] [of his brother]newspaper by everyone] [of his brother]ii..

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

Ross (1967): Ross (1967): Right Roof ConstraintRight Roof ConstraintAn element cannot move rightward out of the clause An element cannot move rightward out of the clause in which it originates.in which it originates.

Rightward movement Rightward movement moremore restricted than restricted than leftward movementleftward movement

8

Insensitive to island Insensitive to island constraintsconstraints(7)(7) A man came into the room [with A man came into the room [with

blond hair].blond hair].

(8)(8) *[With what color hair]*[With what color hair]ii did a man _ did a man _ii come into the room? come into the room? (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 24)(Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 24)

Rightward movement Rightward movement lessless restricted restricted than leftward movementthan leftward movement

9

Extraposition and Extraposition and TopicalizationTopicalizationAn extraposed relative clause cannot be related to a An extraposed relative clause cannot be related to a topicalized phrase.topicalized phrase.

- Antecedent contained in a topicalized VP:Antecedent contained in a topicalized VP:(9)(9) a.a. John said he would meet a man at the party who was from John said he would meet a man at the party who was from

Philadelphia, and meet Philadelphia, and meet a mana man at the party at the party who was from who was from PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia he did. he did.

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

- Antecedent itself topicalized:Antecedent itself topicalized:(10)(10)a.a. MicroMicro brews that are located around the Bay Areabrews that are located around the Bay Area , I like., I like.

b.b. **Micro brewsMicro brews, I like , I like that are located around the Bay Areathat are located around the Bay Area .. (Kiss 2003)(Kiss 2003)

10

Frozenness to further Frozenness to further extractionextractionNo dislocation out of an extraposed phrase:No dislocation out of an extraposed phrase:

(11)(11) a. Whoa. Whoii did you see a picture of _ did you see a picture of _ii in the newspaper? in the newspaper?

b. *Whob. *Whoii did you see a picture in the newspaper of _ did you see a picture in the newspaper of _ii??

But extraposition from But extraposition from whwh-moved objects possible:-moved objects possible:(12)(12) [Which book _[Which book _j j ]]ii did she write _ did she write _ii last year [that takes last year [that takes

only two hours to read]only two hours to read]jj??

(13)(13) [Which woman _[Which woman _j j ]]ii did he meet _ did he meet _ii yesterday [from the yesterday [from the south of France]south of France]jj? ?

(Keller 1995)(Keller 1995)

11






12

Extraposition as a Extraposition as a rightward movement rightward movement processprocess

- Extraposed phrase base-Extraposed phrase base-generated within the NPgenerated within the NP

- Movement to a position adjoined Movement to a position adjoined to IP or VPto IP or VP

- Extraposed phrase related to a Extraposed phrase related to a gap within the antecedent NPgap within the antecedent NP

- How is this adjunction licensed?How is this adjunction licensed?

13

Baltin (1981): Baltin (1981): Generalized SubjacencyGeneralized Subjacency

In the configuration A...[In the configuration A...[aa......[[bb...B...]...]...A',...B...]...]...A',

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

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

14

Problems with Generalized Subjacency:Problems with Generalized Subjacency:

- Stipulation of the set of bounding nodes Stipulation of the set of bounding nodes for leftward movementfor leftward movement

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

- Violation of the principle in (14):Violation of the principle in (14):(14)(14) I saw it [I saw it [PPPP in [ in [NPNP a magazine _ a magazine _ii ]] ]]

yesterday yesterday [which was lying on the table][which was lying on the table]ii. . (Baltin (Baltin

2001) 2001)

15

Guéron (1980) and Guéron&May (1984)Guéron (1980) and Guéron&May (1984)

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

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

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

- Explanation of subject-object asymmetryExplanation of subject-object asymmetry

16

Arguments against movement Arguments against movement account:account:

- Unmotivated distinction between Unmotivated distinction between rightward and leftward movementrightward and leftward movement

- Coordinate structures:Coordinate structures:(15)(15)A manA manii came in and a woman came in and a womanjj went out went out

whowhoi+ji+j know each other very well. know each other very well. (Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 45)(Culicover&Rochemont 1990, 45)

(16)(16)John saw a manJohn saw a manii and Mary saw a woman and Mary saw a womanjj whowhoi+ji+j were wanted by the police. were wanted by the police. (Kiss 2002, (Kiss 2002,

20n.)20n.)

17

Base generationBase generation

- Extraposed phrase base-generated in its Extraposed phrase base-generated in its extraposed positionextraposed position

- How is this position licensed?How is this position licensed?- Culicover&Rochemont (1990): extraposed Culicover&Rochemont (1990): extraposed

complements related to their antecedents by complements related to their antecedents by a relation of coindexing subject to the a relation of coindexing subject to the restrictions imposed by the restrictions imposed by the Complement Complement PrinciplePrinciple::

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

- Problem: semantic relation between the Problem: semantic relation between the extraposed element and its antecedentextraposed element and its antecedent

18






19

Keller (1995)Keller (1995)

- Extraposition as a nonlocal Extraposition as a nonlocal dependencydependency

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

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

20

Keller Keller (1995)(1995)

21

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

- Feature PERIPHERY (PER), located under Feature PERIPHERY (PER), located under LOCALLOCAL

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

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

- In case [PER In case [PER leftleft], the EXTRA element percolates ], the EXTRA element percolates up to find a phrase with right peripheryup to find a phrase with right periphery

- For English, all lexical entries marked [PER For English, all lexical entries marked [PER leftleft]]

22

- To implement the binding of To implement the binding of extraposed elements, an additional extraposed elements, an additional immediate dominance schema is immediate dominance schema is introducedintroduced

- Subtype of Subtype of head-struchead-struc called called head-head-extra-strucextra-struc bearing the feature bearing the feature EXTRA-DTRS (with a non-empty list EXTRA-DTRS (with a non-empty list of of signsign as its value) as its value)

23

Head-Extra Schema

Keller (1995)Keller (1995)

24

- Head daughter [PER Head daughter [PER rightright] since the ] since the binding of extraposed phrases is only binding of extraposed phrases is only possible at the right periphery of a possible at the right periphery of a phrasephrase

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

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

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

25

(18)(18) I don‘t see much argument myself any I don‘t see much argument myself any longerlonger against differential rentsagainst differential rents. .

(Keller 1995)(Keller 1995)

26

Kiss (2002, 2003)Kiss (2002, 2003)

- Relative Clause ExtrapositionRelative Clause Extraposition- A non-movement accountA non-movement account- Extraposition treated as an anaphoric Extraposition treated as an anaphoric

process by means of percolation of anchors process by means of percolation of anchors to which the relative clause is boundto which the relative clause is bound

- Basic idea expressed by the principle of Basic idea expressed by the principle of Generalized ModificationGeneralized Modification::The index of a modifying phrase has to be The index of a modifying phrase has to be identified with a suitable index contained in identified with a suitable index contained in the phrase to which the modifier is adjoined.the phrase to which the modifier is adjoined.

27

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

- Projection governed by the Projection governed by the Anchors Anchors Projection PrincipleProjection Principle::The anchors set of a headed phrase The anchors set of a headed phrase consists of the union of the anchors set of consists of the union of the anchors set of the daughters less those anchors that are the daughters less those anchors that are specified as TO-BIND|ANCHORS on the specified as TO-BIND|ANCHORS on the head daughter.head daughter.

28

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

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

29

Kiss (2003)Kiss (2003)

30






31

- Certain sentences not acceptable in isolationCertain sentences not acceptable in isolation

- Acceptability improved in an appropriate Acceptability improved in an appropriate discourse context:discourse context:

(19)(19) a.a. A man arrived who wasn‘t wearing any A man arrived who wasn‘t wearing any clothes.clothes.

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

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

32

Verbs of appearanceVerbs of appearance- Guéron (1980): constraints on the level of LF interact Guéron (1980): constraints on the level of LF interact

with pragmatic factors (rules of semantic interpretation with pragmatic factors (rules of semantic interpretation and discourse) to filter syntactic outputsand discourse) to filter syntactic outputs

- „„Ss which are unacceptable in isolation become Ss which are unacceptable in isolation become acceptable in a context in which the verb is acceptable in a context in which the verb is pragmatically emptied of all semantic content beyond pragmatically emptied of all semantic content beyond that of ‚appearence in the world of the discourse‘.“ that of ‚appearence in the world of the discourse‘.“

(Guéron 1980, 653-4)(Guéron 1980, 653-4)

(21)(21) a. A man appeared from India.a. A man appeared from India.b. *A man died from India.b. *A man died from India.

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

33

Question Under Discussion Question Under Discussion (QUD)(QUD)Maynell (2003): Extraposition of Maynell (2003): Extraposition of restrictive relative clauses from definite restrictive relative clauses from definite NP subjectsNP subjects

(23)(23) a. a. A cocktail waitress entered the A cocktail waitress entered the dining room dining room who was wearing a blond who was wearing a blond wig.wig.

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

34

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

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

35

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

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

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

- Extraposed relative clause must Extraposed relative clause must provide provide new informationnew information with with respect to the respect to the immediateimmediate QUDQUD

36






37

ConclusionConclusion

- Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic Syntactic, semantic and pragmatic factors involvedfactors involved

- My aim: to give an integrated My aim: to give an integrated approach to Extrapositionapproach to Extraposition

- Open questionsOpen questions

38

ReferencesReferences

Baltin, Mark R. (1981): Strict Bounding. In Carl Lee Baker, John J.Baltin, Mark R. (1981): Strict Bounding. In Carl Lee Baker, John J. McCarthy, eds., McCarthy, eds., The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition,The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, Cambridge,Cambridge, MassachusettsMassachusetts:: MIT MIT,, 257 257--229595. .

Baltin, MarkBaltin, Mark R R. (Draft of 2001): . (Draft of 2001): Extraposition, the Right RoofExtraposition, the Right Roof Constraint,Constraint, Result Clauses, Relative Clause Extraposition, and PPResult Clauses, Relative Clause Extraposition, and PP ExtrapositionExtraposition. . ((http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/lingu/people/faculty/http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/lingu/people/faculty/ baltin/papers/extrapos.pdfbaltin/papers/extrapos.pdf).).

Culicover, Peter W., Michael S. Rochemont (1990):Culicover, Peter W., Michael S. Rochemont (1990): Extraposition andExtraposition and thethe Complement Principle. In Complement Principle. In LinguisticLinguistic InquiryInquiry 21:1, 21:1, 23-47.23-47.

Guéron, Jacqueline (1980): On the Syntax and Semantics ofGuéron, Jacqueline (1980): On the Syntax and Semantics of PPPP Extraposition. In Extraposition. In Linguistic Inquiry Linguistic Inquiry 11:4,11:4, 637-678.637-678.

Guéron, Jacqueline, Robert May (1984): Extraposition and LogicalGuéron, Jacqueline, Robert May (1984): Extraposition and Logical Form.Form. In In Linguistic InquiryLinguistic Inquiry 15:1, 1-31 15:1, 1-31..

39

Keller, Frank (1995): Towards an Account of Extraposition in Keller, Frank (1995): Towards an Account of Extraposition in HPSG.HPSG. InIn Proceedings of the 7Proceedings of the 7thth Conference of the European Conference of the European Chapter ofChapter of thethe A Association for ssociation for Computational LinguisticsComputational Linguistics. Student . Student Session.Session. Dublin, 301-306Dublin, 301-306. . ((http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/keller/papers/eacl95.pdfhttp://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/keller/papers/eacl95.pdf).).

Kiss Tibor (2002): Semantic Constraints on Relative ClauseKiss Tibor (2002): Semantic Constraints on Relative Clause Extraposition.Extraposition. Forthcoming iForthcoming in n Natural Language and Natural Language and Linguistic TheoryLinguistic Theory. . ((http://www.linguistics.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/~kiss/publications.htmlhttp://www.linguistics.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/~kiss/publications.html))..

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

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

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

Ross, John Robert (1967): Ross, John Robert (1967): Constraints on Variables in SyntaxConstraints on Variables in Syntax. . DoctoralDoctoral Dissertation. Reproduced by The Linguistics Club of Dissertation. Reproduced by The Linguistics Club of IndianaIndiana University, Fall 1968. University, Fall 1968. (Reprinted [1986]: (Reprinted [1986]: Infinite Infinite SyntaxSyntax! ! Norwood, NJ: Norwood, NJ: Ablex.).Ablex.).

extraposition from np heike walker georg-august university of göttingen cogeti workshop heidelberg...

Documents

conclusion slide

leftward movement slide

color hair i

definition extraposition

vp phrase

np movement

syntactic analyses

topicalized phrase