Complement Structures: Equi and Raising HPSG WS 2007/08 Janina Kopp 20.12.2007.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Lecture 3a Clause functions Adapted from Mary Laughren.
Advertisements

 Christel Kemke 2007/08 COMP 4060 Natural Language Processing Feature Structures and Unification.
07/05/2005CSA2050: DCG31 CSA2050 Introduction to Computational Linguistics Lecture DCG3 Handling Subcategorisation Handling Relative Clauses.
NP Movement Passives, Raising: When NPs are not in their theta positions.
Chapter 4 Syntax.
Sub-constituents of NP in English September 12, 2007.
Syntax Lecture 10: Auxiliaries. Types of auxiliary verb Modal auxiliaries belong to the category of inflection – They are in complementary distribution.
Language and Cognition Colombo, June 2011 Day 2 Introduction to Linguistic Theory, Part 4.
Linguistic Theory Lecture 7 About Nothing. Nothing in grammar Language often contains irregular paradigms where one or more expected forms are absent.
Statistical NLP: Lecture 3
October 8, : Grammars and Lexicons Lori Levin (Examples from Kroeger)
Lecture 6: Verbs with Clausal Arguments
1 LIN 1310B Introduction to Linguistics Prof: Nikolay Slavkov TA: Qinghua Tang CLASS 18, March 13, 2007.
Constraining X-bar theory using the mental dictionary
1 Annotation Guidelines for the Penn Discourse Treebank Part B Eleni Miltsakaki, Rashmi Prasad, Aravind Joshi, Bonnie Webber.
DS-to-PS conversion Fei Xia University of Washington July 29,
Installment 10b. Raising, etc CAS LX 522 Syntax I.
Week 9b. A-movement cont’d
Week 8. Midterm debrief CAS LX 522 Syntax I. Midterm results Mean: 88 Mean: 88 Median: 93 Median: 93 A A- B+ B B-
June 7th, 2008TAG+91 Binding Theory in LTAG Lucas Champollion University of Pennsylvania
Transformations To the basic sentence patterns. There transformation The transformed sentence “looks right” and the underlying form is often hard to find.
Syntax Lecture 3: The Subject. The Basic Structure of the Clause Recall that our theory of structure says that all structures follow this pattern: It.
Week 6a. Case and checking (with a little more  -Theory) CAS LX 522 Syntax I.
Embedded Clauses in TAG
Feature structures and unification Attributes and values.
1 LIN 1310B Introduction to Linguistics Prof: Nikolay Slavkov TA: Qinghua Tang CLASS 14, Feb 27, 2007.
Introduction to English Syntax Level 1 Course Ron Kuzar Department of English Language and Literature University of Haifa Chapter 2 Sentences: From Lexicon.
Syntax Lecture 8: Verb Types 1. Introduction We have seen: – The subject starts off close to the verb, but moves to specifier of IP – The verb starts.
Relative clauses Chapter 11.
Sentence Structure Every sentence should have at least one main clause. This clause must contain: a subject a subject a verb phrase a verb phrase a predicate.
IV. SYNTAX. 1.1 What is syntax? Syntax is the study of how sentences are structured, or in other words, it tries to state what words can be combined with.
A movement 4 Nov 5, 2012 – Day 28 Introduction to Syntax ANTH 3590/7590 Harry Howard Tulane University.
CSE Introduction to Computational Linguistics Tuesdays, Thursdays 14:30-16:00 – South Ross 101 Fall Semester, 2011 Instructor: Nick Cercone
October 15, 2007 Non-finite clauses and control : Grammars and Lexicons Lori Levin.
12/06/1999 JHU CS /Jan Hajic 1 Introduction to Natural Language Processing ( ) Statistical Parsing Dr. Jan Hajič CS Dept., Johns Hopkins Univ.
Albert Gatt LIN3021 Formal Semantics Lecture 4. In this lecture Compositionality in Natural Langauge revisited: The role of types The typed lambda calculus.
Rules, Movement, Ambiguity
Linguistic Theory Lecture 5 Filters. The Structure of the Grammar 1960s (Standard Theory) LexiconPhrase Structure Rules Deep Structure Transformations.
 Chapter 8 (Part 2) Transformations Transformational Grammar Engl 424 Hayfa Alhomaid.
Syntax Lecture 6: Missing Subjects of Non-finite Clauses.
SYNTAX.
◦ Process of describing the structure of phrases and sentences Chapter 8 - Phrases and sentences: grammar1.
Lecture 1: Trace Theory.  We have seen that things move :  Arguments move out of the VP into subject position  Wh-phrases move out of IP into CP 
SYNTAX 1 NOV 9, 2015 – DAY 31 Brain & Language LING NSCI Fall 2015.
1 Some English Constructions Transformational Framework October 2, 2012 Lecture 7.
Linguistics Lecture-1: Words Pushpak Bhattacharyya, CSE Department, IIT Bombay 14 June, 2008.
1 Principles & Parameters Approach in Linguistics II Bibhuti Bhusan Mahapatra.
September 26, : Grammars and Lexicons Lori Levin.
Lec. 10.  In this section we explain which constituents of a sentence are minimally required, and why. We first provide an informal discussion and then.
Week 3. Clauses and Trees English Syntax. Trees and constituency A sentence has a hierarchical structure Constituents can have constituents of their own.
Week 12. NP movement Text 9.2 & 9.3 English Syntax.
Chapter 4 Syntax a branch of linguistics that studies how words are combined to form sentences and the rules that govern the formation of sentences.
King Faisal University جامعة الملك فيصل Deanship of E-Learning and Distance Education عمادة التعلم الإلكتروني والتعليم عن بعد [ ] 1 King Faisal University.
Embedded Clauses in TAG
Lecture 4: The Complementiser System
English Syntax Week 12. NP movement Text 9.2 & 9.3.
Lecture 3: Functional Phrases
Statistical NLP: Lecture 3
Natural Language Processing
Behavioral Properties of Subjects: matrix coding as subject
Lecture 4b: Verb Processes
Lecture 7: Missing Subjects of Non-finite Clauses
Natural Language Processing
TREE ADJOINING GRAMMAR
Instructor: Nick Cercone CSEB -
ENG 3306 Raising and Control I.
: 2018.
Linguistic Essentials
Syntax Lecture 12: Extended VP.
Presentation transcript:

Complement Structures: Equi and Raising HPSG WS 2007/08 Janina Kopp

Outline About Equi and Raising Constructions About Equi and Raising in HPSG Expletive pronoun constructions (Raising Expletives)

What are Equi and Raising Constructions? Consider the following two sentence pairs: They tend to run They try to run John believes Mary to own Fido John persuades Mary to own Fido On the first sight, the underlying structure looks just the same, however, there is a crucial difference.

Motivation and Distinction Tests We will now see what evidence there is for assuming two different underlying structures These differences can be used to distinguish such constructions

Comparison They try to run try: subject control verb or equi verb they is agent argument of both try and run They tend to run tend: raising verb they is agent argument only of run, not of tend John persuaded Mary to own Fido persuade: object control verb Mary is direct object of persuaded, but semantically both patient of persuaded and agent of to own Fido John believed Mary to own Fido believe: object raising verb Mary is the direct object of believed and subject of to own Fido

Test 1: passivization Think about how the meaning of these sentences changes: (1a) John believed Mary to own Fido (1b) John believed Fido to be owned by Mary (2a) John persuaded Mary to own Fido (2b) John persuaded Fido to be owned by Mary  in (1), both sentences have the same meaning  in (2a), Mary is the persuadee, while in (2b) it is Fido

Test 2: insertion of verbal adjuncts John persuaded Mary firmly to own Fido *John believed Mary firmly/honestly to own Fido

Test 3: paraphrasing (1) John persuaded Mary to own Fido (1’) John persuaded Mary that she should own Fido (2) John believed Mary to own Fido (2’) John believed that Mary owned Fido persuade: three-place-predicate:  Subject John, Primary Object Mary, Secondary Object [that she should own Fido] believe: two-place-predicate:  Subject John, Object [that Mary owned Fido]

Test 4: complement omission John persuaded/told/convinced Mary to own Fido, but I don’t think he has persuaded/told/ convinced Sandy yet. *John believed/expected/reported Mary to own Fido, but I don’t think he has believed/expected/ reported Sandy. They try/refuse/hope to run, but I don’t think that you try/refuse/hope. *They tend/continue/happen to run, but I don’t think that you tend/continue/happen.

Test 5: there as a complement There with subject raising verbs: There tends to be disorder after a revolution. There seems to be some misunderstanding. There kept being problems with the analysis. There with object raising verbs: Kim believed there to be some misunderstanding. Compare with corresponding equi constructions: *There tries to be disorder after a revolution. *There hopes to be some misunderstanding. *Kim persuaded there to be some misunderstanding.

Realization in HPSG a. They try to run.b. They tend to run.

More on semantic roles Equi controllers are assigned semantic roles:  (101)  a. The doctor tried to examine Sandy.  TRYER: doctor  b. Sandy tried to be examined by the doctor.  TRYER: Sandy  (102)  a. Kim persuaded the doctor to examine Sandy.  PERSUADEE: the doctor  b. Kim persuaded Sandy to be examined by the doctor.  PERSUADEE: Sandy

More on semantic roles However:  (103)  a. Kim believed the doctor to have examined Sandy  b. Kim believed Sandy to have been examined by the doctor The raising controller does not have a semantic role in “believe”. We only have a SOA-ARG which associates the doctor with the EXAMINER role and Sandy with the EXAMINEE role.

Expletive it or there Only raising constructions allow expletive it or there as a complement:  There tends to be disorder after a revolution.  Kim believed there to be some misunderstanding.  *There tries to be disorder after a revolution.  *Kim persuaded there to be some misunderstanding.  It tends to be warm in September  Lee believes it to bother Kim that Sandy snores.  *It tries to be warm in September  *Lee persuades it to bother Kim that Sandy snores. An equi controller has to be of sort ref.

SUBCAT list of persuade:

SUBCAT list of believe:

More examples on expletive it Kim persuades it to run  it is of sort ref Kim persuades it to rain  it is of sort it  ungrammatical Kim believes it to run  it is of sort ref Kim believes it to rain  it is of sort it

Shared information The unexpressed subject of the VP complement is identified with equi controller’s index in equi verbs raising controller’s SYNSEM value in raising verbs Examples of Icelandic: raising controllers in Icelandic share CASE values with the unexpressed subjects of unsaturated complements.

Raising Principle Let E be a lexical entry whose SUBCAT list L contains an element X not specified as expletive. Then X is lexically assigned no semantic role in the content of E if and only if L also contains a (nonsubject) Y[SUBCAT ].  this is only a constraint on lexical entries  follows from the generalization that unassigned arguments must be raising controllers  unassigned arguments can only be on the SUBCAT list if there is a corresponding unsaturated phrase

More on complement omission persuaded  They told Jan to leave, convinced persuaded but I don’t think they have told Sandy yet. convinced seems  *Taylor tends to be obnoxious, seems but I don’t think that Gerry tends.

More on complement omission p. 141: “Removing the unsaturated complement from a raising verb’s SUBCAT list would leave a semantically unassigned SUBCAT element that was not raised.”  there is no “TENDER” (subject raising) or “BELIEVEE” (object raising) NP substitution:  (122) Leslie tried something.  (123) *Whitney tends something.  tends assigns no semantic role to its subject, Whitney, so there must be an unsaturated complement on the SUBCAT list. Something, though, is already saturated.

Auxiliary element to to is treated as a verb in HPSG, and more explicitly, as a raising verb

Summary Equi/Raising raising verbs fail to assign a semantic role to one of their dependents the entire SYNSEM value of the SUBCAT list element of the VP complement is structure shared with the raising controller allows it and there as a complement equi verbs only the INDEX of the VP complement’s subject is structure shared with the equi controller controllers are assigned semantic roles

Expletive pronoun constructions We already saw that the sort there or it is inappropriate for NP dependents that are assigned a semantic role:  *There died.  *We like there very much.  *It died.  *We talked to it. (it not being a ppro) environments subcategorizing for there:  subject of copula (be, is), with add. postcopula environments subcategorizing for it (no ref allowed!):  weather verbs (rain, snow)  temporal expressions (late, five o’clock)  extraposed clauses (It bothers me that Sandy snores)  can also occur in the object position (“I take it that you pay”)

Expletive pronoun constructions be – an example (143)  CONTENT is token identical to the CONTENT of the XP[+PRD]  The unexpressed subject of the XP[+PRD] complement is structure shared with the postcopular NP complement  CONTENT is not determined by subject, but by the postcopular NP and the XP element  CONTENT is complete even before adding Subject NP there to the structure  NUM value of the NP there is dependent on the postcopular NP

Extraposition Lexical Rule verbs/adjectives combining with an extraposed clause:  It bothers Kim that Sandy snores.  That Sandy snores bothers Kim. The idea is to assume an underlying, basic lexical entry and a rule that transforms its SUBCAT list. The Extraposition Lexical Rule removes an S[comp] from a SUBCAT list, replacing it by NP it and appends the S[comp] to the end of the SUBCAT list.  SUBCAT (explain, mention)   SUBCAT  SUBCAT (regret, resent)   SUBCAT

Extraposition Lexical Rule However, there are still exceptions that need to be listed separately:  It seems that Sandy is snoring.  *That Sandy is snoring seems.

Raised Expletives