introduction to lfg - university of essex · 2007-07-03 · introduction to lfg – 2 / 60...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Introduction to LFG – 1 / 60
Introduction to LFG
Mary DalrympleCentre for Linguistics and Philology
Oxford University
LSA Linguistic Institute 2007
Day 3
![Page 2: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
L F G LFG
Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60
■ “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammaticalfunctions belong to parallel information structures of verydifferent formal character. They are related not byproof-theoretic derivation but by structuralcorrespondences, as a melody is related to the words of asong. The song is decomposable into parallel melodic andlinguistic structures, which jointly constrain the nature ofthe whole. In the same way, the sentences of humanlanguage are themselves decomposable into parallel systemsof constraints – structural, functional, semantic, andprosodic – which the whole must jointly satisfy.”Bresnan (1990)
If our theory does not include movement or other derivationalprocesses, how do we treat nonlocal relations between apredicate and its argument?
![Page 3: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
L F G Nonlocality
Introduction to LFG – 3 / 60
Nonlocal phenomena:
■ Raising: David seemed to yawn.
![Page 4: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
L F G Nonlocality
Introduction to LFG – 3 / 60
Nonlocal phenomena:
■ Raising: David seemed to yawn.
■ Control: David tried to catch the ball.
![Page 5: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
L F G Nonlocality
Introduction to LFG – 3 / 60
Nonlocal phenomena:
■ Raising: David seemed to yawn.
■ Control: David tried to catch the ball.
■ Wh-questions: Who do you think David took to the party?
![Page 6: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
L F G Nonlocality
Introduction to LFG – 3 / 60
Nonlocal phenomena:
■ Raising: David seemed to yawn.
■ Control: David tried to catch the ball.
■ Wh-questions: Who do you think David took to the party?
How are these treated in a nontransformational, constraint-basedtheory?
![Page 7: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
L F G Raising
Introduction to LFG – 4 / 60
“Raising” verbs like seem were treated in early transformationalgrammar by raising the subject of a subordinate clause up intothe main clause (hence the term “raising”):
S
NP VP
V
seemed
S
NP
David
VP
to yawn
⇒
S
NP
David
VP
V
seemed
S
VP
to yawn
This captures the intuition that the raising verb does not assigna semantic role to the raised argument.
![Page 8: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
L F G Raising to subject
Introduction to LFG – 5 / 60
David seemed to yawn.
■ C-structure: No evidence that there is a trace or otherphrasal material in subject position in the subordinateclause.
■ F-structure: Functionally, the “raised” argument Davidbehaves as both the subject of seem and the subject of thesubordinate clause. This is functional control.
![Page 9: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
L F G Raising to subject: ‘seem’
Introduction to LFG – 6 / 60
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V′
V
seemed
VP
V′
V
to
VP
V
yawn
pred ‘seem〈xcomp〉subj’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
xcomp
pred ‘yawn〈subj〉’
subj
Line from David f-structure toxcomp subj indicates functionalcontrol: the same f-structure is thesubj and the xcomp subj.
![Page 10: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
L F G Raising to subject
Introduction to LFG – 7 / 60
Evidence for subjecthood in matrix clause:
■ Position
■ Verb agreement: David seems/*seem to yawn; theyseem/*seems to yawn
![Page 11: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
L F G Raising to subject
Introduction to LFG – 7 / 60
Evidence for subjecthood in matrix clause:
■ Position
■ Verb agreement: David seems/*seem to yawn; theyseem/*seems to yawn
Evidence for subjecthood in subordinate clause:
■ Reflexivization: English reflexives are clause-bound.Davidi believed that [Janej voted for herselfj/*himselfi].
A reflexive is possible in the subordinate clause:David seemed to like himself.
![Page 12: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
L F G Raising to object
Introduction to LFG – 8 / 60
David believed Chris to know the answer.
■ C-structure: Again, no evidence that there is a trace orother phrasal material in subject position in the subordinateclause.
■ F-structure: Functionally, the “raised” argument Chrisbehaves as the object of believe and the subject of thesubordinate clause.
![Page 13: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
L F G Raising to object: ‘believe’
Introduction to LFG – 9 / 60
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V′
V
believed
NP
N
Chris
VP
V′
V
to
VP
know the answer
pred ‘believe〈subj,xcomp〉obj’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj[
pred ‘Chris’]
xcomp
pred ‘know〈subj,obj〉’
subj
obj
spec[
pred ‘the’]
pred ‘answer’
The object of believe functionallycontrols the subject of know.
![Page 14: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
L F G Raising to object
Introduction to LFG – 10 / 60
■ Accusative case for “raised” argument:David believed him to know the answer.
■ Reflexivization: A reflexive in raised object position ispossible.David believed himself to be the best candidate.
■ Reflexivization: A reflexive in the subordinate clause canhave the raised object as its antecedent.Davidi believed Chrisj to like himself∗i,j .
![Page 15: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
L F G Nonthematic arguments
Introduction to LFG – 11 / 60
It is raining.
pred ‘rain〈〉subj’
subj [form it ]
Nonthematic arguments appear outside angled brackets insemantic form.
![Page 16: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
L F G Nonthematic arguments
Introduction to LFG – 12 / 60
It seems to be raining.
There seems to be a problem.
David believed it to be raining.
David believed there to be a problem.
![Page 17: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
L F G Nonthematic arguments
Introduction to LFG – 13 / 60
It seems to be raining.
pred ‘seem〈xcomp〉subj’
subj [form it ]
xcomp
pred ‘rain〈〉subj’
subj
Since seems does not assign a semantic role to its subject, asemantically empty subject is allowed as the raised argument.
![Page 18: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and nonthematic arguments
Introduction to LFG – 14 / 60
David believed it to be raining.
pred ‘believe〈subj,xcomp〉obj’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj [form it ]
xcomp
pred ‘rain〈〉subj’
subj
![Page 19: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and case: Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 15 / 60
Icelandic “quirky case”: Andrews (1982)
Accusative subject:
Drenginaboys.acc
vantarlacks
mat.food
‘The boys lack food.’
![Page 20: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and case: Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 15 / 60
Icelandic “quirky case”: Andrews (1982)
Accusative subject:
Drenginaboys.acc
vantarlacks
mat.food
‘The boys lack food.’
Accusative “raised” object:
Hannhe
telurbelieves
migme.acc
(ı(in
barnaskapfoolishness
sınum)his)
vantato.lack
peninga.money
‘He believes me (in his foolishness) to lack money.’
Adverb placement shows that mig appears in object position inthe main clause.
![Page 21: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and nonthematic arguments
Introduction to LFG – 16 / 60
Same f-structure is the subject of lack and the object of believe→ the raised object must obey the case requirements appropriateto the subject of lack.
pred ‘believe〈subj,xcomp〉obj’
subj[
pred ‘he’]
obj
[
pred ‘me’
case acc
]
xcomp
pred ‘lack〈subj,obj〉’
subj
obj[
pred ‘money’]
![Page 22: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and case: Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 17 / 60
Dative subject:
Barninuchild.def.dat
batnaDirecovered.from
veikin.disease.def.nom
‘The child recovered from the disease.’
![Page 23: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and case: Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 17 / 60
Dative subject:
Barninuchild.def.dat
batnaDirecovered.from
veikin.disease.def.nom
‘The child recovered from the disease.’
Dative “raised” object:
Hannhe
telurbelieves
barninuchild.def.dat
(ı(in
barnaskapfoolishness
sınum)his)
hafato.have
batnaD
recovered.fromveikin.disease.def.nom
‘He believes the child (in his foolishness) to have recovered fromthe disease.’
![Page 24: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and case: Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 18 / 60
Genitive subject:
Verkjannapains.def.gen
gætiris.noticeable
ekki.not
‘The pains are not noticeable.’
![Page 25: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
L F G Raising verbs and case: Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 18 / 60
Genitive subject:
Verkjannapains.def.gen
gætiris.noticeable
ekki.not
‘The pains are not noticeable.’
Genitive “raised” object:Hannhe
telurbelieves
verkjannapains.def.gen
(ı(in
barnaskapfoolishness
sınum)his)
ekkinot
gæta.noticeable
‘He believes the pains (in his foolishness) not to be noticeable.’
![Page 26: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
L F G Rules and lexical entries
Introduction to LFG – 19 / 60
V′ −→(
V↑= ↓
) (
NP(↑ obj) = ↓
) (
VP(↑ xcomp) = ↓
)
![Page 27: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
L F G Rules and lexical entries
Introduction to LFG – 19 / 60
V′ −→(
V↑= ↓
) (
NP(↑ obj) = ↓
) (
VP(↑ xcomp) = ↓
)
seemed V (↑ pred) = ‘seem〈xcomp〉subj’(↑ subj) = (↑ xcomp subj)
believed V (↑ pred) = ‘believe〈subj,xcomp〉obj’(↑ obj) = (↑ xcomp subj)
![Page 28: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
L F G Control
Introduction to LFG – 20 / 60
Control verbs like try were treated in early transformationalgrammar by the “equi-NP deletion” transformation, and are stillsometimes called “equi” verbs:
S
NP
David
VP
V
tried
S
NP
David
VP
to leave
⇒
S
NP
David
VP
V
tried
S
NP
∆
VP
to leave
This captures the intuition that a controlled argument gets twosemantic roles: one from the control verb, and one from thesubordinate verb.
![Page 29: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
L F G Control verbs
Introduction to LFG – 21 / 60
David tried to leave.
pred ‘try〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
comp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj[
pred ‘pro’]
Obligatory anaphoric control (Dalrymple, 2001, chapter 12):closed complement comp, not open complement xcomp. Thereis a semantic relation between the controller and theunpronounced pronominal subject of xcomp, but they aredifferent syntactic objects.
![Page 30: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
L F G Control verbs
Introduction to LFG – 22 / 60
David tried to leave.
pred ‘try〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
comp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj[
pred ‘pro’]
Semantic role assigned by control verb to controller, whichappears inside angled brackets.
![Page 31: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
L F G Control verbs
Introduction to LFG – 23 / 60
Alternative view (Bresnan, 1982; Falk, 2001; Asudeh, 2005):‘try’ involves functional control, not anaphoric control.
pred ‘try〈subj,xcomp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
xcomp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj
Ongoing theoretical debate within LFG: do control verbs involvefunctional control or anaphoric control? Do they all behave alike,or are there different subclasses?
![Page 32: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
L F G Control verbs
Introduction to LFG – 23 / 60
Alternative view (Bresnan, 1982; Falk, 2001; Asudeh, 2005):‘try’ involves functional control, not anaphoric control.
pred ‘try〈subj,xcomp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
xcomp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj
Ongoing theoretical debate within LFG: do control verbs involvefunctional control or anaphoric control? Do they all behave alike,or are there different subclasses?
Answers to these questions not dictated by formal framework ofLFG, but by the linguistic facts.
![Page 33: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
L F G Control in Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 24 / 60
Accusative subject:
Drenginaboys.acc
vantarlacks
mat.food
‘The boys lack food.’
![Page 34: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
L F G Control in Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 24 / 60
Accusative subject:
Drenginaboys.acc
vantarlacks
mat.food
‘The boys lack food.’
Subject control: No case preservation (Andrews, 1982)
EgI.nom
vonasthope
tilto
aD
tovantalack
ekkinot
efnimaterial
ıfor
ritgerDina.thesis
‘I hope to not lack material for the thesis.’
![Page 35: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
L F G Control in Icelandic
Introduction to LFG – 24 / 60
Accusative subject:
Drenginaboys.acc
vantarlacks
mat.food
‘The boys lack food.’
Subject control: No case preservation (Andrews, 1982)
EgI.nom
vonasthope
tilto
aD
tovantalack
ekkinot
efnimaterial
ıfor
ritgerDina.thesis
‘I hope to not lack material for the thesis.’
Conclusion: Anaphoric control, not functional control.
![Page 36: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
L F G Object control verbs
Introduction to LFG – 25 / 60
David convinced Chris to leave.
pred ‘convince〈subj,obj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj[
pred ‘Chris’]
comp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj[
pred ‘pro’]
Object of convince anaphorically controls subject of leave.
![Page 37: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
L F G Raising and control: C-structure
Introduction to LFG – 26 / 60
Raising and control verbs pattern alike at c-structure:
![Page 38: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
L F G Raising and control: C-structure
Introduction to LFG – 26 / 60
Raising and control verbs pattern alike at c-structure:
The students seem clearly to be intelligent. (xcomp)
The students tried hard to be on time. (comp)
The students believed David to have left. (xcomp)
The students convinced David to leave. (comp)
![Page 39: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
L F G Raising and control: C-structure
Introduction to LFG – 26 / 60
Raising and control verbs pattern alike at c-structure:
The students seem clearly to be intelligent. (xcomp)
The students tried hard to be on time. (comp)
The students believed David to have left. (xcomp)
The students convinced David to leave. (comp)
V′ −→(
V↑= ↓
) (
NP(↑ obj) = ↓
) (
VP(↑ {xcomp| comp}) = ↓
)
![Page 40: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
L F G Lexical entries
Introduction to LFG – 27 / 60
Control verbs supply an unpronounced pronominal subject fortheir complements:
tried V (↑ pred) = ‘try〈subj,comp〉’(↑ comp subj pred) = ‘pro’
convinced V (↑ pred) = ‘convince〈subj,obj,comp〉’(↑ comp subj pred) = ‘pro’
![Page 41: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
L F G C-structure
Introduction to LFG – 28 / 60
IP
NP(↑ subj)=↓
N↑=↓
David(↑ pred)=‘David’
I′
↑=↓
VP↑=↓
V′
↑=↓
V↑=↓
tried(↑ pred)=‘try〈subj,comp〉’(↑ comp subj pred) = ‘pro’
VP(↑ comp)=↓
V′
↑=↓
V↑=↓
to
VP↑=↓
V↑=↓
leave(↑ pred)=‘leave〈subj〉’
![Page 42: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
L F G F-structure
Introduction to LFG – 29 / 60
pred ‘try〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
comp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj[
pred ‘pro’]
![Page 43: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
L F G Object control
Introduction to LFG – 30 / 60
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V′
V
convinced
NP
N
Chris
VP
V′
V
to
VP
V
leave
pred ‘convince〈subj,obj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj[
pred ‘Chris’]
comp
pred ‘leave〈subj〉’
subj[
pred ‘pro’]
![Page 44: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
L F G Control
Introduction to LFG – 31 / 60
Characteristics of control and raising verbs (Borjars and Vincent,2004):
■ the relation is obligatory: the control equation is introducedvia the lexical entry of the control or raising verb
■ the relation involves command (either c-command orf-command, the analogue at f-structure): the controllingverb is one clause up, and thus the controller necessarilycommands the controllee
![Page 45: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
L F G Nonlocality
Introduction to LFG – 32 / 60
Nonlocal phenomena:
■ Raising: David seemed to yawn.
■ Control: David tried to catch the ball.
■ Wh-questions: Who do you think David took to the party?
![Page 46: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
L F G Nonlocal Dependencies
Introduction to LFG – 33 / 60
In English wh-questions, the wh-phrase appears at the beginningof the sentence and also plays a syntactic role within the clause:
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
is
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
eating
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 47: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
L F G Functional Uncertainty
Introduction to LFG – 34 / 60
CP
NP
N′
What
C′
C
do
IP
NP
N
you
I′
VP
V
think
IP
NP
N
Chris
I′
VP
V
bought
focus[
pred ‘what’]
pred ‘think〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘you’]
comp
pred ‘buy〈subj,obj〉’
subj[
pred ‘Chris’]
obj
![Page 48: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
L F G Questions
Introduction to LFG – 35 / 60
■ What is the function of the displaced constituent?
![Page 49: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
L F G Questions
Introduction to LFG – 35 / 60
■ What is the function of the displaced constituent?
■ What is its within-clause role?
![Page 50: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
L F G Questions
Introduction to LFG – 35 / 60
■ What is the function of the displaced constituent?
■ What is its within-clause role?
■ How and where is this relation defined?
![Page 51: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 36 / 60
■ What is the function of the displaced constituent?
![Page 52: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 36 / 60
■ What is the function of the displaced constituent?
■ Specifiers of functional categories bear grammaticizeddiscourse functions topic, focus.
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
is
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
eating
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 53: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 37 / 60
■ What is the within-clause role of the displaced constituent?
![Page 54: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 37 / 60
■ What is the within-clause role of the displaced constituent?
■ Extended Coherence Condition:
![Page 55: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 37 / 60
■ What is the within-clause role of the displaced constituent?
■ Extended Coherence Condition: focus and topic must belinked to the semantic predicate argument structure of thesentence in which they occur, either by functionally or byanaphorically binding an argument.
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 56: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 38 / 60
■ How and where is this relation defined?
![Page 57: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 38 / 60
■ How and where is this relation defined?
■ Defined at f-structure, in terms of the f-structure path toclause-internal function.
![Page 58: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
L F G The Path
Introduction to LFG – 39 / 60
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
is
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
eating
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 59: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 40 / 60
Where are the constraints imposed? Ongoing theoretical debate:
![Page 60: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 40 / 60
Where are the constraints imposed? Ongoing theoretical debate:
■ Constraints are associated with position of displacedconstituent (Kaplan and Zaenen, 1989), or
![Page 61: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 40 / 60
Where are the constraints imposed? Ongoing theoretical debate:
■ Constraints are associated with position of displacedconstituent (Kaplan and Zaenen, 1989), or
■ Constraints are associated with within-clause position (a“trace”) (Bresnan, 2001).
Traces are compatible with a nontransformational,constraint-based theory, but not required by theory-internalconsiderations; linguistic evidence determines which position iscorrect. More on this later in the lecture.
![Page 62: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
L F G Long Distance Dependencies
Introduction to LFG – 41 / 60
No traces:
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
is
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
eating
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 63: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
L F G Long Distance Dependencies
Introduction to LFG – 41 / 60
With traces:
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
is
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
eating
NP
t
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 64: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 42 / 60
■ How is the path defined?
![Page 65: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 42 / 60
■ How is the path defined?
■ By functional uncertainty: regular expression overgrammatical functions.
![Page 66: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 42 / 60
■ How is the path defined?
■ By functional uncertainty: regular expression overgrammatical functions.
■ Example: comp* obj stands for paths with any number ofcomp functions followed by an obj function.
![Page 67: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
L F G English WH-questions
Introduction to LFG – 43 / 60
CP −→ XP(↑ focus) = ↓
(↑ focus) = (↑ comp∗ gf)
C′
↑= ↓
Kleene star operator: *
COMP∗ represents:
the empty pathCOMPCOMP COMP. . .
![Page 68: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
L F G Nonlocal Dependencies
Introduction to LFG – 44 / 60
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
is
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
eating
pred ‘eat〈subj,obj〉’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 69: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
L F G Functional Uncertainty
Introduction to LFG – 45 / 60
CP
NP
N′
What
C′
C
do
IP
NP
N
you
I′
VP
V
think
IP
NP
N
Chris
I′
VP
V
bought
focus[
pred ‘what’]
pred ‘think〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘you’]
comp
pred ‘buy〈subj,obj〉’
subj[
pred ‘Chris’]
obj
![Page 70: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
L F G Functional Uncertainty
Introduction to LFG – 46 / 60
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
do
IP
NP
N
you
I′
VP
V′
V
think
IP
NP
N
Chris
I′
VP
V′
V
hoped
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V
bought
focus[
pred ‘what’]
pred ‘think〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘you’]
comp
pred ‘hope〈subj,comp〉’
subj[
pred ‘Chris’]
comp
pred ‘buy〈subj,obj〉’
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj
![Page 71: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
L F G XCOMP
Introduction to LFG – 47 / 60
CP
NP
N
What
C′
C
did
IP
NP
N
David
I′
VP
V′
V
believe
NP
N
Chris
VP
V′
V
to
VP
V
like
pred ‘believe〈subj,comp〉obj’
focus[
pred ‘what’]
subj[
pred ‘David’]
obj[
pred ‘Chris’]
xcomp
pred ‘like〈subj,obj〉’
subj
obj
![Page 72: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
L F G Augmenting the Path
Introduction to LFG – 48 / 60
CP −→ XP(↑ focus) = ↓
(↑ focus) = (↑ {xcomp|comp}∗ gf)
C′
↑= ↓
{xcomp|comp}∗ represents:
the empty pathCOMPXCOMPCOMP XCOMPCOMP COMPXCOMP COMP XCOMP. . .
![Page 73: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
L F G Constraints on unbounded dependencies
Introduction to LFG – 49 / 60
Sentential subject condition:*What did [that Chris bought ] surprise you?
SUBJ is not allowed as a component of Path:
focus[
pred ‘what’]
pred ‘surprise〈subj,obj〉’
subj
pred ‘buy〈subj,obj〉’
subj[
pred ‘Chris’]
obj
obj[
pred ‘you’]
X
![Page 74: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
L F G Functional uncertainty
Introduction to LFG – 50 / 60
(Outside-in/“regular”) functional uncertainty:
Path through f leads to g
f :[
comp comp comp. . . obj g]
(f comp* obj)=g
![Page 75: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
L F G No traces
Introduction to LFG – 51 / 60
Constraints associated with fronted position.
CP −→
XP(↑ focus) = ↓
(↑ focus) = (↑ {xcomp|comp}∗ gf)
(
C′
↑ = ↓
)
![Page 76: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
L F G Functional uncertainty
Introduction to LFG – 52 / 60
Inside-out functional uncertainty:Path through f leads to g
f :[
comp comp comp. . . obj g]
f = (comp* obj g)
![Page 77: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
L F G With traces
Introduction to LFG – 53 / 60
Constraints associated with trace.
CP −→(
XP(↑ focus) = ↓
) (
C′
↑ = ↓
)
![Page 78: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
L F G With traces
Introduction to LFG – 53 / 60
Constraints associated with trace.
CP −→(
XP(↑ focus) = ↓
) (
C′
↑ = ↓
)
NP −→ t
↑= (({xcomp|comp}∗ gf ↑ ) focus)
![Page 79: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
L F G Weak crossover: Evidence for traces?
Introduction to LFG – 54 / 60
Most arguments for the existence of traces have been discredited.Evidence from crossover has been more difficult to refute.
Crossover in transformational terms: a transformation cannotapply if it would result in a NP “crossing over” a coreferentialNP.
Crossover in nontransformational terms, assuming traces: Thetrace of a displaced NP cannot appear to the right of acoreferential NP.
![Page 80: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
L F G Weak and strong crossover
Introduction to LFG – 55 / 60
Strong crossover violation: coreferential pronoun precedes andc-commands extraction site
*Whoi did hei greet t?(cannot mean: Who greeted himself?)
Weak crossover violation: coreferential pronoun precedes butdoes not c-command extraction site
*Whoi did hisi mother greet t?(cannot mean: Whosei mother greeted himi?)
Crossover appears to provide evidence for traces: see Bresnan(1995) and Dalrymple et al. (2006) for discussion and debate.
![Page 81: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
L F G Wrapup
Introduction to LFG – 56 / 60
■ We have examined the formal foundations and basictheoretical assumptions of LFG,
![Page 82: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
L F G Wrapup
Introduction to LFG – 56 / 60
■ We have examined the formal foundations and basictheoretical assumptions of LFG,
■ and discussed some areas of current theoretical debate.
![Page 83: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
L F G Wrapup
Introduction to LFG – 56 / 60
■ We have examined the formal foundations and basictheoretical assumptions of LFG,
■ and discussed some areas of current theoretical debate.
■ For more on LFG, visit the LFG website:http://www.essex.ac.uk/linguistics/LFG/
![Page 84: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
L F G Wrapup
Introduction to LFG – 56 / 60
■ We have examined the formal foundations and basictheoretical assumptions of LFG,
■ and discussed some areas of current theoretical debate.
■ For more on LFG, visit the LFG website:http://www.essex.ac.uk/linguistics/LFG/
■ attend the Bresnan lectures (LSA.347) and theAsudeh/Toivonen lectures (LSA.309) in the main session atthe Institute,
![Page 85: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
L F G Wrapup
Introduction to LFG – 56 / 60
■ We have examined the formal foundations and basictheoretical assumptions of LFG,
■ and discussed some areas of current theoretical debate.
■ For more on LFG, visit the LFG website:http://www.essex.ac.uk/linguistics/LFG/
■ attend the Bresnan lectures (LSA.347) and theAsudeh/Toivonen lectures (LSA.309) in the main session atthe Institute,
■ and attend LFG07, here at Stanford, 28-30 July:http://www-csli.stanford.edu/ thking/lfg07.html
![Page 86: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 57 / 60
Andrews, Avery, III. 1982. The representation of case in modernIcelandic. In Joan Bresnan (editor), The Mental Representationof Grammatical Relations, pp. 427–503. Cambridge, MA: TheMIT Press
Asudeh, Ash. 2005. Control and semantic resource sensitivity.Journal of Linguistics 41(3), pp. 465–511
Borjars, Kersti and Nigel Vincent. 2004. Introduction to LFG.Slides from the Winter School in LFG and ComputationalLinguistics, University of Canterbury
Bresnan, Joan. 1982. Control and complementation. In JoanBresnan (editor), The Mental Representation of GrammaticalRelations, pp. 282–390. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
![Page 87: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 58 / 60
Bresnan, Joan. 1990. Parallel constraint grammar project. CSLICalendar, 4 October 1990, volume 6:3
Bresnan, Joan. 1995. Linear order, syntactic rank, and emptycategories: On weak crossover. In Mary Dalrymple, Ronald M.Kaplan, John T. Maxwell, and Annie Zaenen (editors), FormalIssues in Lexical-Functional Grammar , pp. 241–274. Stanford,CA: CSLI Publications
Bresnan, Joan. 2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax . Oxford:Blackwell Publishers
Dalrymple, Mary. 2001. Lexical Functional Grammar , volume 34of Syntax and Semantics. New York, NY: Academic Press
![Page 88: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 59 / 60
Dalrymple, Mary, Ronald M. Kaplan, John T. Maxwell, III, andAnnie Zaenen (editors). 1995. Formal Issues inLexical-Functional Grammar . Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications
Dalrymple, Mary, Ronald M. Kaplan, and Tracy Holloway King.2006. The absence of traces: Evidence from weak crossover. InJane Grimshaw, Joan Maling, Chris Manning, Jane Simpson, andAnnie Zaenen (editors), Architectures, Rules, and Preferences: AFestschrift for Joan Bresnan. Stanford: CSLI Publications
Falk, Yehuda N. 2001. Lexical-Functional Grammar: AnIntroduction to Parallel Constraint-Based Syntax . Stanford, CA:CSLI Publications
![Page 89: Introduction to LFG - University of Essex · 2007-07-03 · Introduction to LFG – 2 / 60 “Semantic roles, syntactic constituents, and grammatical functions belong to parallel](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022081402/5f08f1e47e708231d4247bfb/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
L F G
Introduction to LFG – 60 / 60
Kaplan, Ronald M. and Annie Zaenen. 1989. Long-distancedependencies, constituent structure, and functional uncertainty.In Mark Baltin and Anthony Kroch (editors), AlternativeConceptions of Phrase Structure, pp. 17–42. Chicago UniversityPress. Reprinted in Dalrymple et al. (1995, pp. 137–165)