Syntax Lecture 2: Categories and Subcategorisation.

Syntax

Lecture 2:Categories and Subcategorisation

Recap

• Last week we saw that there is just on general kind of structure, the instances of which differ only in that they have different lexical heads

• Lexical heads have idiosyncratic properties (such as syntactic category) which are projected into the phrase structure

• So phrases differ depending on how lexical heads differ in their syntactic properties

Differences in lexical heads

• So how syntactically different can lexical heads be?

• There are two way heads differ– They have different categories– They differ in what complements they select

How many different categories are there?

• If phrases differ depending on what the category of the head is, but there can be an unlimited number of categories, we don’t have a very restrictive theory

• So is there a restrictive theory of categories?

Observation: we don’t need many categories for description

• Most syntactic descriptions work with a relatively small number of different categories• Noun• Verb• Adjective• Adverb• Preposition• Pronoun

• Determiner• Particle• Subordinator• Coordinator• Auxiliary verb• Degree adverb

• In fact, some of these collapse into single categories

Collapsing categories: pronouns and determiners

• Many determiners work as pronouns– This book was banned This was banned– Some people are sad Some are sad– Few aeroplanes crash Few crash

• Some pronouns work as determiners– We humans– Them rocks (dialectal)– You lot

Collapsing categories: pronouns and determiners

• Those that cannot behave like the others are in complementary distribution with each other:– This map is wrong This is wrong– The map is wrong * The is wrong– * It map is wrong It is wrong

• This suggest they belong to the same category (like transitive and intransitive verbs)

Collapsing categories: subordinators and adverbs

• Some subordinating particles behave exactly like adverbs

• Obviously, he had gone• He, obviously, had gone• He had gone, obviously

• However, he had gone• He, however, had gone• He had gone, however

• They differ only in meaning – subordinating particles link sentences to other sentences

• But this is no reason to give them different syntactic categories

Collapsing categories: subordinators and adverbs

• Some subordinating particles don’t behave like adverbs

• Obviously, he had gone• He, obviously, had gone• He had gone, obviously

• ... that he had gone• * ... he that had gone• * ... he had gone that

• These are clearly of a different category• We call them Complementisers

Collapsing Categories: adverbs and adjectives

• Many adverbs and adjectives have the same root:– obvious: obviously fast: fast great: greatly

• This morphology is more like inflection than derivation– It is productive and semantically uniform• like: smile: smiled walk: walked• not like: give: gift grow: growth wear: ?

Collapsing Categories: adverbs and adjectives

• Adverbs and adjectives are in complementary distribution– Adverbs modify verbs, adjectives modify nouns– So we might see them as different subcategories

of a general category of ‘modifier’

• We refer to this category as A

Conclusion

• So it seems that the number of categories we need to describe language is very small

• Why is that?• Without a theory of categories, we can’t

explain this.

Different categories sometimes have things in common

• Verbs and prepositions take ‘bare’ objects:– visited London saw the man shot him– to London for the man with him

• Nouns and Adjectives take objects with ‘of’:– Picture of Mary growth of the trees– Fond of Mary mindful of the trees


• Phrases headed by determiners and prepositions can appear in ‘cleft’ position:– It was the map that was wrong– It was on the street that I met him

• Phrases headed by verbs and adjectives cannot:– * it was drive the car that he could– * it was melted that the ice cream was


• How can we explain these facts if categories are completely unconnected?

A theory of categories

• We know that all categories fall into one of two main types

• Functional• Determiners• Auxiliary verbs• Complementisers• Etc.

• Thematic• Nouns• Verbs• Adjectives/

adverbs• Etc.


• This suggests a ‘binary feature’ analysis– (like distinctive features in phonology: ±voice,

±long)

• Suppose we assume a feature ±F– Functional categories are +F– Thematic categories are -F


• But this still isn’t very restrictive• One way to restrict the system is to assume

that all categories are defined by binary features

• This would also account for similarities between different categories– Distinct categories can share one or more features• (like different phonemes can be +voice)


• Clearly we need more than one more feature as there are more than four categories needed

• But if we have too many features the number of categories they predict grows:– 1 feature = 2 categories– 2 features = 4 categories– 3 features = 8 categories– 4 features = 16 categories– 10 features = 1024 categories

A theory of categories• Suppose we suggest two extra features:– ±N (things which are ‘nounlike’)– ±V (things which are ‘verblike’)

• Assuming nouns and verbs to be opposites to each other we get:– Noun = [-F, +N, -V]– Verb = [-F, -N, +V]

• This is supported by the fact that nouns and verbs share very little in common

• The system also predicts 6 more possible categories

-F categories

• There are two more –F categories:– [-F, +N, +V]– [-F, -N, -V]

• The first seems appropriate for A– They modify both nouns and verbs– Adjectives are often used as nouns

• The good, the bad and the ugly– In some languages adjectives are used as verbs– Nouns and adjectives don’t take bare objects– Verbs and adjectives can’t appear in cleft position

-F categories

• [-F, -N, -V] seems appropriate for prepositions:– Prepositions have no morphological properties• They can’t be tensed• They can’t be plural

– Like verbs, they take bare objects (both are –N)– Like nouns, they head phrases which can be

clefted (they are both –V)

-F categories

• We predict the following possible categories

• We also predict that there are no other thematic categories

+F categories

• The theory predicts four functional categories• These are the functional equivalents to:– Nouns ([+F, +N, -V])– Verbs ([+F, -N, +V])– A ([+F, +N, +V])– Prepositions ([+F, -N, -V])

The functional noun equivalent

• The most obvious choice is the determiner– This is the functional category which plays a role

in the nominal system

• Determiner = [+F, +N, -V]

The functional verb equivalent

• Similarly, the choice is obvious: the auxiliary– These are functional verbs

• Auxiliary = [+F, -N, +V]

The functional A equivalent

• As determiners precede nouns and auxiliaries precede verbs, the degree adverb precedes adjectives and adverbs:– so tall so quickly– as stupid as accurately– too cold too frequently

• Degree adverbs (Deg) = [+F, +N, +V]

The functional preposition equivalent

• Prepositions introduce nominal arguments• Complementisers introduce clausal arguments• One complementiser is very much like a

preposition in that it appears to be able to be followed by a ‘bare object’– I was anxious [for him to pass the exam]

• Complementisers = [+F, -N, -V]

+F categories

• We predict the following possible categories

• We also predict that there are no other thematic categories

Subcategories

• The subcategories of a category are determined by what follows them– E.g. Verbs can be transitive (i.e. they are followed

by an object) or intransitive (i.e. they are not followed by an object)

• In other words, subcategories are determined by what appears in the complement position

The complement of functional categories

• The functional categories do not usually have subcategories – they are almost always take the same complements– The complement of an auxiliary verb is always a

VP• may [VP win the race]

– The complement of a complementiser is always a sentence• that [he may win the race]

The complement of functional categories

– The complement of a degree adverb is always an AP• so [AP fond of chocolate]

– The complement of a determiner is usually an NP• The [NP man from Brazil]

– But some determiners can appear without a complement (e.g. pronouns)• him

The complements of thematic categories

• Thematic categories can take various types of complement and so have a number of subcategories

• Verbs can be followed by– A DP see [DP the news]

– A clause think [ that he saw the news]– A PP react [PP to the news]

– An AP feel [AP sorry]

– s


• Prepositions can have the same range of complements as verbs, except for clauses– DP to [DP the west]

– PP from [PP under the bed]

– AP (range) from [AP heavy] to [AP medium]


• Nouns can have the same complements as verbs, except for DPs– Clauses belief [that he can fly]– PP reaction [PP to the news]

– AP (his) feeling [AP ill]


• ‘A’s can take clausal and PP complements– Clause likely [that he will fail]– PP keen [PP on ice hockey]

Syntax Lecture 2: Categories and Subcategorisation.

Documents

Transcript of Syntax Lecture 2: Categories and Subcategorisation.