# 1 Scrambled or Sunny Side Up? Jack Hoeksema CLCG U of Groningen.

## Presentation on theme: "1 Scrambled or Sunny Side Up? Jack Hoeksema CLCG U of Groningen."— Presentation transcript:

1 Scrambled or Sunny Side Up? Jack Hoeksema CLCG U of Groningen

2 Scrambling of definites  Scrambling Je hoeft je bord niet leeg t te eten You have your plate not empty to eat “You don’t have to finish your plate’  Or not: Je hoeft niet je bord leeg te eten

3 OT conditions (De Hoop 2003)  NEW: Anaphoric elements scramble (Anaphoric: prior mention: old before new)  STAY: No scrambling  SC1 (= Surface Correspondence 1): Definites Scramble

4 Anttila’s Theory of Variation  An output candidate is predicted by the grammar iff it wins in some tableau (given a partial ranking of constraints)  If a candidate wins in n tableaux and t is the total number of tableaux, then the candidate’s probability of occurrence is n/t

5 Anaphoric Definites  3 constraints relevant, so 6 possible orderings  when STAY dominates the rest, there is no scrambling, otherwise scrambling is optimal  in 2 out of 6 orderings, STAY is dominant  So probability of scrambling is 2/3

6 Nonanaphoric definites  NEW is irrelevant  so only the interaction of STAY and SC1 matters  when STAY > SC1, no scrambling  when SC1 > STAY, scrambling  hence probability of scrambling for nonanaphoric definites is 1/2

7 Bidirectional perspective: Case 1, Scrambling Def. NP < ADVNEWSC-1STAY +ANA* -ANA*  Hearer perspective: both interpretations are optimal in case of Scrambling

8 Bidirectional perspective: Case 2, Nonscrambling Adv < Def. NPNEWSC-1STAY +ANA**  -ANA*  Hearer perspective: in case of nonscrambling, nonanaphoric reading is optimal. Note that the ordering of the constraints is irrelevant

9 So  De Hoop’s production OT predicts for [+anaphoric] definite noun phrases 67% scrambling, 33% nonscrambling  Bidirectional OT (using De Hoop’s constraints) would predict 100% scrambling, since nonscrambling would lead to [–anaphoric] readings

10 Testing the theory: informally collected data FeaturesN%Predicted +def, + anaph, + scr44**9066,6% +def, + anaph, - scr5**1033,3% +def, -anaph, +scr424750% +def, -anaph, -scr485250%

11 Some specific combinations  Ik kan die vent niet uitstaan I can that guy not stand ‘I cannot stand that guy’  *Ik kan niet die vent uitstaan Note: die vent is an epithet, so +def, +anaphoric

12 Internet data  die vent niet uitstaan: 33 occurrences (Google)  niet die vent uitstaan: 0 occurrences

13 other epithets, with de  Ik kan de man niet uitstaan I can the man not stand ‘I can’t stand the guy’  *Ik kan niet de man uitstaan

14 or het  Ik kan het mens niet luchten I can the woman not stand ‘I can’t stand the woman’  *Ik kan niet het mens luchten

15 or with other adverbs  Ik heb het mens nog gewaarschuwd I have the woman yet warned ‘I did warn the woman’  *Ik heb nog het mens gewaarschuwd

16 De/het N niet aankunnen ‘the N not can handle’  Hij kon de druk niet aan. He could the pressure not on ‘He couldn’t handle the pressure’ Corpus data  Def. Object: 37 cases of Scrambling  0 cases of Nonscrambling order

17 [-anaphoric]  You have the right to remain silent –Het recht ‘the right’ –De tijd ‘the time’ –De moed ‘the courage’ –De energie ‘the energy’

18 Rise of nonscrambling +def, –anaph direct objects of have/give/get (raw numbers) Period+Scrambling-Scrambling < 185012- 1850-1900193 1900-19503915 1950-20003634 2000-20084244

19 Rise of nonscrambling order among +def, –anaph direct objects of have/give (in %)

20 Zo veel N “so much N”  Ik heb niet zo veel geld I have not so much money ‘I don’t have so much money’  Ik heb zo veel geld niet

21 Raw numbers ZO VEEL N Period+Scrambling-Scrambling < 185043- 1850-190072 1900-195038 1950-2000313 2000-2008318

22 Def. Objects versus ZO VEEL N

23 Conclusions  Scrambling of [-ANAPHORIC] definite objects is slowly on its way out  Scrambling is highly sensitive to the difference between [+ANAPHORIC] and [-ANAPHORIC] definites  Stochastic OT is probably more suitable for describing scrambling than Anttila’s theory of variation

24 References  Helen de Hoop, 2003, ‘Scrambling in Dutch: Optionality and Optimality’, in: Simin Karimi, ed., Word Order and Scrambling, Blackwell.  Arto Anttila & Young-mee Cho, 1998, ‘Variation and Change in Optimality Theory.’ Lingua 104:31-56.