Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar

375 Pages·2013·2.39 MB·English

Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on
Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar
Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany
Stefan Müller (Editor)
2009
CSLI Publications
http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2009
The papers are published under a CC-BY license:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Contents
1 Editor’sNote 4
GabrielaBîlbîie,FrédéricLaurens: AConstruction-basedAnalysisofVerb-
lessRelativeAdjunctsinFrenchandRomanian 5
OlivierBonami,PolletSamvelian: InflectionalperiphrasisinPersian 26
RuiP.Chaves: Construction-basedCumulationandAdjunctExtraction 47
BertholdCrysmann: DerivingSuperficialErgativityinNias 68
MarianneDesmets,FlorenceVilloing: FrenchVNlexemes: morphological
compoundinginHPSG 89
AntskeFokkens,LauriePoulson,EmilyM.Bender: InflectionalMorphol-
ogyinTurkishVPCoordination 110
Anke Holler: Towards an analysis of the adverbial use of German inter-
rogativewas(‘what’) 131
Gianina Iorda˘chioaia, Frank Richter: Negative Concord in Romanian as
PolyadicQuantification 150
PaulKay,IvanA.Sag: HowHardaProblemWouldThisBetoSolve? 171
DavidLahm: AnAlternativetotheHPSGRaisingPrincipleontheDescription-
Level 192
StefanMüller: OnPredication 213
StefanMüller,JannaLipenkova: SerialVerbConstructionsinChinese:
AHPSGAccount 234
BjarneØrsnes: PreposedNegationinDanish 255
Shakthi Poornima, Jean-Pierre Koenig: Hindi Aspectual Complex Predi-
cates 276
FrankRichter,ManfredSailer: PhraseologicalClausesinConstructional
HPSG 297
FilipSkwarski: AccountingforUnderlyingFormsinHPSGPhonology 318
Jesse Tseng: Phonological change and grammaticalization in HPSG: The
caseofFrenchfinalconsonants 338
2
FrankVanEynde: Onthecopula: fromaFregeantoaMontagoviantreat-
ment 359
3
1 Editor’s Note
The 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar
(2009)washeldinGöttingen.
Theconferencefeatured2invitedtalksand19papersselectedbytheprogram
committee (Anne Abeille, Doug Arnold [chair], Olivier Bonami, Bob Borsley,
Gosse Bouma, Rui Chaves, Berthold Crysmann, Markus Egg, Elisabet Engdahl,
Dan Flickinger, Jonathan Ginzburg, Chikara Hashimoto, Jong-Bok Kim, Tibor
Kiss, Anna Kupsc, Shalom Lappin, Bob Levine, Rob Malouf, Detmar Meurers,
Stefan Müller, Tsuneko Nakazawa, Gerald Penn, Adam Przepiorkowski, Frank
Richter,LouisaSadler,IvanSag,JesseTseng,StephenWechsler).
In total there were 34 submissions to the conference. We want to thank the
programcommitteeforputtingthisniceprogramtogether.
Thanks go to Anke Holler, Manfred Sailer, Heike Walker, Gert Webelhuth
[chair],whowereinchargeoflocalarrangements.
As inthe past yearsthe contributions tothe conference proceedings arebased
onthefivepageabstractthatwasreviewedbytherespectiveprogramcommittees,
but there is no additional reviewing of the longer contribution to the proceedings.
Toensureeasyaccessandfastpublicationwehavechosenanelectronicformat.
The proceedings include all the papers except those by Danièle Godard and
AnneAbeilléandPollyJacobson.
4
A Construction-based Analysis of
Verbless Relative Adjuncts in French
and Romanian
Gabriela Bîlbîie Frédéric Laurens
LLF,UniversitéParisDiderotParis7 LLF,UniversitéParisDiderotParis7
Proceedingsofthe16thInternationalConferenceon
Head-DrivenPhraseStructureGrammar
Georg-August-UniversitätGöttingen,Germany
StefanMüller(Editor)
2009
CSLIPublications
pages5–25
http://csli-publications.stanford.edu/HPSG/2009
Bîlbîie, Gabriela, & Laurens, Frédéric. 2009. A Construction-based Analysis of
VerblessRelativeAdjunctsinFrenchandRomanian. InMüller,Stefan(Ed.),Pro-
ceedings of the 16th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure
Grammar, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Germany, 5–25. Stanford, CA:
CSLIPublications.
Abstract
French and Romanian verbless relative adjuncts are incidental adjuncts
which have been described as elliptical relative clauses. We show that this
analysisisnotempiricallyadequateandproposeanalternativenon-elliptical
analysis.Weanalyzeverblessrelativeadjunctsassententialfragmentswhose
headcanbeaclusterofphrases. Theyaremarkedbyafunctorphrasewhich
displays selection properties with respect to the head phrase and makes an
essentialcontributiontothesemanticsoftheadjunct. Theanalysisrelieson
the interaction of grammatical constraints introduced by various linguistic
objects, as well as on a constructional analysis of verbless relative adjuncts
distinguishingseveralsubtypes.
1 Introduction
Both French and Romanian have verbless adjuncts whose form is reminiscent of
relative clauses. These verbless adjuncts are exemplified in (1) for French and in
(2)forRomanian. Theyarecharacterizedbythepresenceofafrontedconstituent
(showninitalics)whichcaneitherbeaprepositionalphrasecontainingaWHform
(1a,2a,2b)ortheformdontinFrench(1b). WelabelthoseconstructionsVerbless
RelativeAdjuncts(henceforthVRAs).
(1) a. Troispersonnes, [parmi lesquelles Jean], sont venues.
three people(FEM),[amongwhich.FEMJohn],AUXcome
‘Threepeople,amongwhichJohn,havecome.’
b. Troispersonnes sont venues,[dont une hier].
three people(FEM) AUXcome, [DONTone.FEMyesterday]
‘Threepeoplehavecome,oneofthemyesterday.’
(2) a. Au venit trei persoane,[{printre|ˆıntre} care (s¸i) Ion].
AUXcomethreepeople, [{among |among}which.ACC(also)John]
‘Threepeoplehavecome,amongwhich(also)John.’
b. Au venit trei persoane, [dintre care una ieri].
AUXcomethreepeople(FEM),[amongwhich.ACCone.FEMyesterday]
‘Threepeoplehavecome,oneofthemyesterday.’
French and Romanian VRAs have been described as elliptical relative clauses
(Grevisse1993,Gheorghe2004andGheorghe2005)onthebasisofsemanticand
syntacticsimilaritieswithnon-restrictiverelativeclauses(3).
†PartofthisworkhasbeenpresentedinBucharestatthe11thConferenceoftheEnglishDepart-
ment. ManythankstoA.Abeille´,D.Arnold,O.Bonami,D.Godard,J-M.Marandin,theaudience
oftheHPSG09Conferenceandthreeanonymousreviewersforhelpfuldiscussionsorusefulsugges-
tions.
6
(3) a. Ilae´critdenombreuxromans,[dontdeuxonte´te´publie´slemoisdernier].
‘He has written many novels, two of which have been published last
month.’
b. Elascrismulteromane,[dintrecaredoua˘ aufostpublicatelunatrecuta˘].
‘He has written many novels, two of which have been published last
month.’
Part ofthe dataused inthis work isbased ona corpusstudy. The Frenchdata
comesfromtheFrenchTreebankofParis7(Abeille´ etal.2003). Lackingasimilar
corpusforRomanian,wecollectedexamplesfrompresstexts.
Thepaperisstructuredasfollows. WefirstfocusontheconstituencyofVRAs.
We show that the elliptical analysis of VRAs is not empirically adequate and pro-
poseanalternativenon-ellipticalanalysis. Then,wediscussthedistributionaland
functional properties of VRAs before turning to their semantic properties. The
analysis is then couched in a constructional version of HPSG (i.e. SBCG, Sag
2007). Theanalysisreliesontheinteractionofgrammaticalconstraintsintroduced
by various linguistic objects, as well as on a constructional analysis of VRAs dis-
tinguishingseveralsubtypes.
Forreasonsofspace,propertiesofVRAswhicharethesameinbothlanguages
are only illustrated for French. Romanian examples are only used when the prop-
ertyisabsentorlessclearinFrench.
2 Constituency
FrenchandRomanianVRAsareconstitutedoftwoparts. Thefirstpart(labeledthe
frontedconstituent)isreminiscentoftheextractedphraseorofthecomplementizer
of a relative clause. The second part (labeled the body) is composed of either a
single phrase or of a sequence of phrases which are not related by grammatical
functions. We show that an analysis of VRAs as elliptical relative clauses is not
empiricallysupportedandproposeanalternativeanalysis.
2.1 Thefrontedconstituent
Thefrontedconstituentof VRAscontainslexicalitemswhicharefoundinrelative
clauses. ThoseitemsincludeformsoftheWHlexemelequelinFrenchandcarein
Romanian, andtheformdont inFrench. WhileFrenchlequelandRomaniancare
arefoundininterrogativeclausestoo,Frenchdontisonlyfoundinrelativeclauses
apartfromitsuseinVRAs.
The WH forms always appear in prepositional phrases in VRAs. The preposi-
tionsheadingthefrontedconstituentallhaveanabstractpartitivemeaningsimilar
to that of the preposition among in English. This includes parmi in French and
dintre,ˆıntre,andprintreinRomanian.
7
Inbothlanguages,morecomplexexpressionsarealsofound,suchasau{pre-
mier | second} rang desquels ‘in the {first | second} row of which’, au sommet
desquels‘atthetopofwhich’,auseindesquels‘inthemiddleofwhich’,aucentre
desquels ‘in the center of which’ or au nombre desquels ‘in the count of which’
in French, and ˆın raˆndul ca˘rora ‘in the row of which’, ˆın mijlocul ca˘rora ‘in the
middleofwhich’orˆınfrunteaca˘rora‘atthetopofwhich’inRomanian. Although
theseexpressionsalmostalwayscompositionallydenotespatialrelations,theyare
only found with an abstract partitive meaning in VRAs. Note that some of these
expressionsadditionallysuggestarankingamongthesubparts.
The WH form appearing in the fronted phrase is coreferential with a noun
phraseprecedingthe VRA inthehostclause,whichwelabelthelicenser (seesec-
tion3.1). ThisissignalledbymorphologicalagreementontheWHforminFrench:
lesquels (MASC) vs. lesquelles (FEM). Agreement cannot be observed in Roma-
nianbecauseboththeaccusativeformcareandthegenitivepluralformca˘rorado
notvaryingender.
InFrench,thefrontedphrasecanalsocontaintheformdont. Apartfromitsuse
inVRAs,theformdontappearsonlyinrelativeclauseswhereithasbeenanalyzed
asacomplementizer(Godard1988).
Likethecomplementizersqueandquiwhicharealsofoundinrelativeclauses,
the complementizer dont only combines with finite clauses (4a). WH relative
clausesontheotherhandarenotalwaysfinite. UnlikeprepositionalWHformslike
duquel ‘of which’, the complementizer dont cannot be embedded within a filler
phrase (4b), and does not show morphological agreement with an antecedent. Fi-
nally,complementizerdontmarksrelativeclausescontainingamissingconstituent
which would be marked by the form de (4c) or any proform coreferential with
the antecedent of the relative clause, as long as the proform is embedded under a
propositional attitude predicate, such as penser ‘to think’ or eˆtre vrai ‘to be true’
(4d).
(4) a. *Unlivre [dont parler]
a book[DONTtalk.INF]
‘Abookwhichweshouldtalkabout’
b. Unhomme,[le fre`re {*dont|duquel} est venu hier]
a man, [thebrother{ DONT| of.which}AUXcomeyesterday]
‘Aman,thebrotherofwhichhascomeyesterday’
c. Unlivre[dontonparlebeaucoup]
‘Abookwhichonetalksabout’
d. Unlivre[dontilestvraiqu’ilcouˆtecher]
‘Abookofwhichitistruethatitisexpensive’
VRAs’ dont shares some of its properties with the complementizer dont. For
instance,itcannotbeembeddedwithinthefrontedconstituentaswell. However,it
8
is unclear whether other selection properties of the complementizer are shared by
VRAs’ dont. Since an elliptical analysis of VRAs is not empirically adequate (see
section2.3),wearguethatitisnotthecase. Moreover,whilecomplementizerdont
isassumedtohavenosemanticcontribution, suchastatementishardtomakefor
VRAs’dontsinceitforcesapartitivesemantics(5),althoughthepartitivesemantics
mayalsobeassumedtobeconstructionallyintroducedinVRAs.
(5) a. Autotal,dixlivresonte´te´ commande´s,[(*dont)touspourtoi].
‘Intotal,tenbookshavebeenordered,allofthemforyou.’
b. Autotal,dixlivresonte´te´ commande´s,[(dont)deuxpourtoi].
‘Intotal,tenbookshavebeenordered,twoofthemforyou.’
TheleftedgeofthefrontedphrasemustcoincidewiththeleftedgeoftheVRA.
Itcannotbelinearizedinorafterthebody(6a)orbeprecededbyadverbials(6b).
(6) a. *Plusieurspersonnes,[Jeanparmilesquelles],sontvenues.
‘Severalpeople,amongwhichJohn,havecome.’
b. *Plusieurspersonnes,[notammentparmilesquellesJean],sontvenues.
‘Severalpeople,amongwhichnotablyJohn,havecome.’
2.2 Thebody
ThebodyofVRAsisconstitutedofeitherasinglephraseorasequenceofphrases.
When the body is a single phrase, it can be either a noun phrase in the citation
form(i.e. noprepositionalmarkinginFrenchandRomanianandnominativecase
inRomanian)oraphraseofanycategorywhoseformparallelsthecorresponding
phraseinthehostclause.
Not every VRA type allows for the two options. In French, WH VRAs do not
allow for marked single phrases and dont VRAs disprefer it. Dont VRAs with a
singlemarkedconstituentarenotasbadastheir WH VRA counterpartsandcanbe
improvedwithadverbs,suchasnotamment‘notably’(7).
(7) Unjeunehommeannoncea` diversespersonnessamortprochaine,[{*parmi
lesquelles|%dont}notammenta` unpsychiatrequide´cidedel’aider].
‘A young man announces his imminent death to several people, {among
which|DONT}notablytoapsychiatristwhodecidestohelphim.’
In Romanian, dintre is incompatible with preposition or case marking (8a)1,
while no such restriction is found with printre and ˆıntre as long as the adverb s¸i
‘also’precedesthem(8b).
(8) a. Ion lucreaza˘ cu s¸apte doctori, [dintre care (*cu)doi rus¸i].
Johnworks withsevendoctors,[amongwhichwith twoRussian]
‘Johnworkswithsevendoctors,twoofthemareRussian.’
1Adverbssuchasmaiales‘especially’canimprovetheacceptabilityof(8a).
9
b. Ion a oferit flori mai multor fete, [printrecare s¸i
JohnAUXofferedflowersADVmany.DATgirls,[amongwhichalso
{Maria |Mariei}].
{Mary.NOM |Mary.DAT}]
‘Johnhasofferedflowerstomanygirls,Maryamongthem.’
The body of a VRA can also be constituted of a sequence of phrases (i.e. a
cluster). Threetypesneedtobedistinguished. ClustersoftypeImimickthesyntax
of the host clause. Inthose clusters, each of the phrases has to be marked like the
correponding phrase in the host clause (9a). Clusters of type II contain a noun
phrase in the citation form and a predicative phrase expressing a property of that
noun phrase (9b). Clusters of type III are only found in VRAs whose licenser is a
past participle used to express a functional property assumed by some individuals
withinaevent. Forexample,unblesse´ ‘aninjuredperson’isthepatientofanevent
inwhichsomeonegetshurt. Inclustersofthattype,theeventrelationofthecluster
iscontributedbythepastparticiple. Asaresult,adverbs,ratherthanadjectives,are
usedtomodifythatrelation(9c).
(9) a. Certainsontparle´ a` mesamis,[dontMarie*(a`)Marc].
‘Somehavespokenwithmyfriends,MarywithMark.’
b. Jevendsdixjeux,[dontlaplupartencoredansleurboˆıte].
‘Iselltengames,themajorityofthemstillintheiroriginalbox.’
c. L’accidentafaitdouzeblesse´s,[dontcinqgrie`vement].
‘Theaccidentlefttwelveinjured,fiveofthemcritically.’
Frontedphrasesshowselectionpropertiesregardingthetypeoftheclusterthey
combinewith. Forinstance,inFrench VRAswithparmi,atleastonephraseinthe
clustermustbeanounphrase. Thesepropertiesoffrontedphrasescombinedwith
propertiesofclustersoftypeIcanresultinungrammaticality(10).
(10) J’aiparle´ a` plusieurspersonneshier,[{dont |*parmilesquelles}a` Mariede
linguistique].
‘Ispokewithseveralpeopleyesterday,ofwhichwithMaryaboutlinguistics.’
2.3 VRAsarenotellipticalrelativeclauses
VRAs are usually referred to as elliptical relative clauses. However, an elliptical
analysisofVRAsfacestwokindsofproblems. Underanellipticalapproach,VRAs
are assumed to be relative clauses which have the additional property of having
someoftheirsyntacticorphonologicalmaterialremoved. Anellipticalanalysisis
ofinterestif,andonlyif,(I)onecanreconstructarelativeclausefromanyVRAin
a regular fashion and (II) the semantic properties of VRAs are the same as that of
relativeclauses. Wearguethatnoneoftheseconditionsareverified.
10