1. Grammar Engineering: Set-valued Attributes Various Kinds of Constraints Case Restrictions on Arguments Miriam Butt (University of Konstanz) and Martin Forst (NetBase Solutions) Colombo 2014

2. Set-valued Attributes Every attribute can only have one value But: Certain elements, e.g. attributive adjectives, adverbial modifiers or PP modifiers can appear multiple times Solution: These elements are projected into elements of set-valued attributes such as ADJUNCT, MOD, etc.

3. Set-valued Attributes (cont’d) Notation VP -->V (NP: (^ OBJ) = !) PP*: ! $ (^ ADJUNCT). NP --> (D) AP*: ! $ (^ ADJUNCT); N.

4. Various Kinds of Constraints Defining equations: Contribute a value for the specified attribute Notation: (^ ATTRIBUTE) = value Constraining equations: Check whether the specified attribute has the specified value, but do not contribute/introduce that value Notation: (^ ATTRIBUTE) =c value Example: Lexical entry of verb may want to check value of PFORM attribute of its PP argument.

5. Various Kinds of Constraints (cont’d) Negated constraints: Enforce that the specified attribute does not have the specified value. Notation: (^ ATTRIBUTE) ~= value Example: Base-form entry of English verb may state that (^ SUBJ PERS) ~= 3 if (^ SUBJ NUM) = sg. Existential constraints: Enforce that the specified attribute has some value, without specifying which value. Notation: (^ ATTRIBUTE) Example: Singular entry of English count noun may state that (^ DEF).

6. Example of a constraining equation The zookeeper waited for the gorilla. waited V * PRED=‘wait ’ (^OBL PFORM) =c for (^TENSE) = past (^MOOD) = indicative.

7. Example of a negated constraint The gorillas wait for the bananas. wait V * PRED=‘wait ’ (^OBL PFORM) =c for (^TENSE) = pres (^MOOD) = indicative { (^SUBJ NUM) = pl | (^SUBJ NUM) = sg (^SUBJ PERS) ~= 3 }.

8. Example of an existential constraint The gorilla ate *(the) banana. banana V * PRED=‘banana’ (^ NUM) = sg (^ DEF).

9. Various kinds of PPs Argument PPs with PFORM instead of PRED for preposition –Verb/adjective/noun takes a PP argument with a particular preposition –Preposition does not really provide any meaning Ex.: the zookeeper waited for the gorilla Argument PPs with PRED for preposition Ex.:the gorilla put the banana in the cage –Verb/adjective/noun takes a PP argument of a certain semantic kind –Preposition does provide same meaning as in adjuncts

10. Various kinds of PPs Adjunct PPs (always with PRED for preposition) Ex.: the gorilla waited for hours the gorilla devoured a banana in the cage –No particular relationship between verb/adjective/noun and PP –PP provides additional, but optional information –Preposition carries meaning

11. Case restrictions on arguments Many languages use case to mark the grammatical function of arguments of verbs, adjectives, etc. E.g., in English, nominative pronouns can only be subjects whereas accusative/oblique pronouns can only be objects and arguments of prepositions. However, there is usually not a one-to-one correspondence between case and grammatical function. Especially in South Asian languages, the relation between case and grammatical function seems to be a complicated one.

12. Case restrictions on arguments There may be default cases for certain grammatical functions which can be overwritten by lexically assigned case. I.e., some verbs may a assign an argument a particular case that diverges from the default case. Apparently, in some languages, the default cases for certain grammatical functions can depend on the tense/aspect of the verb.

13. Case restrictions on arguments Back to English: –No major complications –Only pronouns encode case –Subjects must be in nominative case –All other arguments must be in accusative/oblique case S --> NP: (^ SUBJ)=! (! CASE)=nom; VP: ^=!. she PRON * PRED=‘she’ (^ CASE) = nom (^ PERS) = 3 (^ NUM) = sg.

14. Case restrictions on arguments PP --> P NP: (! CASE) = acc { (^ OBJ)=! | ^ = ! }. her PRON * PRED=‘she’ (^ CASE) = acc (^ PERS) = 3 (^ NUM) = sg.