By Broekhuis, Hans
This learn indicates that Scandinavian item shift and so-called A-scrambling within the continental Germanic languages are a similar, and goals at offering an account of the difference that we discover with admire to this phenomenon by way of combining yes facets of the Minimalist software and Optimality conception. extra in particular, it truly is claimed that representations created by means of a simplified model of the computational method of human language CHL are evaluated in an optimality theoretic type through taking recourse to a truly small set of output constraints.
Read or Download Derivations and Evaluations: Object Shift in the Germanic Languages PDF
Best language & grammar books
This examine exhibits that Scandinavian item shift and so-called A-scrambling within the continental Germanic languages are a similar, and goals at supplying an account of the difference that we discover with admire to this phenomenon via combining yes features of the Minimalist software and Optimality idea. extra in particular, it's claimed that representations created through a simplified model of the computational approach of human language CHL are evaluated in an optimality theoretic style by means of taking recourse to a truly small set of output constraints.
This publication offers novel facts from endangered languages and cultures which are ever so frequently nonetheless now not concerned with. It combines various disciplines to seize the intricacies of spatial orientation and navigation. additionally, the interaction among tradition via language and practices offers new insights within the significance of mixing cognitive semantics with cognitive anthropology.
This ebook offers a finished review of semi-supervised methods to dependency parsing. Having develop into more and more well known in recent times, one of many major purposes for his or her luck is they could make use of enormous unlabeled info including really small categorized facts and feature proven their merits within the context of dependency parsing for plenty of languages.
The contributions of this publication care for the problem of language edition. all of them percentage the belief that in the language school the difference house is hierarchically restricted and that minimum alterations within the set of estate values defining each one language provide upward push to assorted outputs in the similar approach.
- Ellipsis in Comparatives
- Reference (Oxford Surveys in Semantics and Pragmatics)
- Mirrors and Microparameters: Phrase Structure Beyond Free Word Order
- Translating as a Purposeful Activity: Functionalist Approaches Explained
- The Translator's Invisibility: A History of Translation (Translation Studies)
Additional info for Derivations and Evaluations: Object Shift in the Germanic Languages
The book [about whichi that he spoke ti] b. *the book [about whichi that he spoke ti] c. *the book [about whichi that he spoke ti] d. *the book [about whichi that he spoke ti] When we contrast these examples with the French relative clauses in (19) and (20), we see that English and French differ in that the former allows a wider variety of constructions with a bare relative pronoun than the latter. However, when the relative pronoun is embedded in a PP (or an NP), the two languages behave the same.
Assume that in both languages the constraint RECOVERABILITY outranks the constraints TEL and LE(CP); the rankings of the constraints in (21) are then as given in (23). Where MP and OT are similar: The architecture of syntax 21 (23) a. b. French: REC >> LE(CP) >> TEL English: REC >> TEL <> LE(CP) The evaluation of the French examples in (19) proceeds as in Tableau 4. Since the relative pronoun has a local antecedent it is recoverable after deletion, so that all candidates satisfy REC. The second candidate is the optimal candidate because it is the only one that does not violate LE(CP); the fact that this candidate violates the lower-ranked constraint TEL is tolerated since this in fact enables the satisfaction of the higher-ranked constraint LE(CP); the violations of TEL therefore do not play a role, which is again indicated by shading the cells of the non-optimal candidates.
The two frameworks are similar in assuming that we are dealing both with derivations and with evaluations: a generator creates a potentially multi-membered set of expressions S, and an evaluator determines which expressions from S are grammatical in a given language L. Although this section has mainly focused on the similarities in architecture between the P&P approaches and OT-syntax, it must be noted that there are other similarities between the two frameworks. For example, both MP and OTsyntax adopt some version of Frege’s principle of compositionality of meaning by claiming that meaningful elements must be interpreted: in MP it is assumed that interpretable semantic features cannot be deleted and must receive an interpretation (Full Interpretation); the fact that Pesetsky’s (1997;1998) constraint RECOVERABILITY is universally ranked high expresses more or less the same thing,3 as does Grimshaw’s (1997) claim that all candidates in a certain candidate set have the same meaning.