Proxy categories in phrase structure theory and the Chinese VP

2002 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-174 ◽  
Author(s):  
Waltraud Paul
Keyword(s):  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Structure Theory

Relabeling Heads: A Unified Account for Relativization Structures

2011 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 519-560 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caterina Donati ◽  
Carlo Cecchetto
Keyword(s):  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Lexical Item ◽  
Structure Theory ◽  
Nominal Phrase ◽  
Free Relative

A tenet of any version of phrase structure theory is that a lexical item can transmit its label when merged with another category. We assume that if it is internally merged, a lexical item can turn a clause into a nominal phrase. If the relabeling lexical item is a wh-word, a free relative results; if it is an N, a full relative results; if it is a non-wh D, a pseudorelative results. It follows that the head of a relative construction cannot be more complex than a lexical item. We show massive evidence that when it is otherwise (e.g., the book about Obama that you bought), the modifier is late-merged after the noun has moved and relabeled the structure.

Phrase structure theory

Syntax ◽  
2012 ◽  
pp. 58-79
Author(s):  
Robert Freidin
Keyword(s):  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Structure Theory

scholarly journals In Defense of What(ever) Free Relative Clauses They Dismiss: A Reply to Donati and Cecchetto (2011)

2019 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 356-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivano Caponigro
Keyword(s):  
Relative Clauses ◽  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Structure Theory ◽  
Free Relative

I argue that the version of phrase structure theory proposed by Donati and Cecchetto (2011) falls short of accounting for the attested patterns of free relative clauses not only in English but crosslinguistically in general. In particular, I show that free relative clauses can be introduced not only by wh-words like what or where, which is what Donati and Cecchetto predict, but also by wh-phrases like what books or whatever books and their equivalents in other languages, which Donati and Cecchetto explicitly predict not to be possible.

scholarly journals The Configurational Matrix

2002 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 529-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ad Neeleman ◽  
Hans van de Koot
Keyword(s):  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Structure Theory ◽  
Basic Assumptions ◽  
Syntactic Relations ◽  
And Function ◽  
Grammatical Dependencies

This article presents a theory of grammatical dependencies that is in accordance with basic assumptions of bare phrase structure theory. It explains Koster's (1987) configurational matrix, the observation that such dependencies share five properties: c-command by the antecedent, obligatoriness, uniqueness of the antecedent, nonuniqueness of the dependent, and locality. The theory is based on two primitive syntactic relations (copying and function application) and a nonatomic view of nodes.

Phrase and Sentence Structure

2019 ◽  
pp. 66-102
Author(s):  
Howard A. Williams
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Power ◽  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Structure Theory ◽  
Syntactic Analysis ◽  
Sentence Structure ◽  
Grammatical Relations

This chapter surveys the basics of the syntax of main clauses, with special attention to English. Readers are guided through the process of doing syntactic analysis with the aid of syntactic trees that model the properties of linearity, hierarchy, and recursion that characterize the syntax of human languages. The model used is a somewhat simplified version of X-bar syntax, which is currently the best-known and best-tested model of phrase structure within the subfield of syntax and which combines the virtues of simplicity, breadth, and predictive power. There is a section on the theory of grammatical relations and its relationship to phrase structure theory, as well as a section providing an overview of basic world constituent orders.

Labels from X-Bar Theory to Phrase Structure Theory

(Re)labeling ◽  
2015 ◽  
pp. 23-44
Author(s):  
Carlo Cecchetto ◽  
Caterina Donati
Keyword(s):  
Phrase Structure ◽  
Structure Theory
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document