Download Case, Scope, and Binding by Maria Bittner (auth.) PDF

By Maria Bittner (auth.)

Case, Scope, and Binding investigates the relation among syntax and semantics inside a framework which mixes the syntactic Government-Binding conception with a singular cross-linguistic idea of case and semantics. it's argued that case project, contract, syntactic binding kinfolk, in addition to the minimal scopes of operators, are all decided through the relatives which carry on the point of s-structure. Cross-linguistic version with appreciate to those phenomena is because of corresponding diversifications on the s-structure point. The minimal scope of an operator can't exceed its c-command area at s-structure, yet should be decreased by means of definite semantic mechanisms. the supply of any wider scope alternative relies on the opportunity of flow at LF. The proposed idea is proven intimately opposed to the evidence of Inuit (Eskimo-Aleut family), an ergative language with typologically strange scope and binding family members.
For linguists and philosophers drawn to syntax, semantics, or the syntax-semantics interface.

Show description

Read Online or Download Case, Scope, and Binding PDF

Best semantics books

The Parameter of Aspect

This paintings provides a unified conception of element inside common Grammar. It offers an strange mixture of syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic ways to a unmarried area, and offers distinctive linguistic analyses of 5 languages with very varied aspectual structures: English, French, Mandarin chinese language, Navajo and Russian.

Frege on Definitions: A Case Study of Semantic Content

During this brief monograph, John Horty explores the problems provided for Gottlob Frege's semantic idea, in addition to its smooth descendents, through the remedy of outlined expressions. The e-book starts by means of targeting the mental constraints governing Frege's inspiration of experience, or which means, and argues that, given those constraints, even the therapy of straightforward stipulative definitions led Frege to special problems.

The Discourse of Italian Cinema and Beyond: Let Cinema Speak

Linguistic research of the discussion of Italian cinema, utilizing options and methodologies from pragmatics, dialog research and discourse research.

Additional info for Case, Scope, and Binding

Sample text

DAT 11 get]-PRP·NBQ· V2,3P /"-..... 311 I -say Ref. e l. 2. 3. 4. lulu], " ranges over higher order predica'es 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. r,(e,I»,t) I T(11) I (T(11),/) t (e,/) C1 o {x,} {PloX,} (PloXd {x,} {al} o {x,} o o What makes this parallelism possible is the syntax and semantics of incorporation. In (74), the antipassive incorporation requires prior reanalysis of the v'-pro- jection of the verb -nirar 'say' as a segment of its vo-projection (cf. sec. 4). The entire reanalyzed complex (rooted in the highest v2-segment) is therefore treated by RULE B as a simple verb, and is interpreted as if it occupied the position of the trace (t2 head of the object NP2) of the incorporated antipassive noun (N2)' The remaining steps in the interpretation of (74) can then proceed essentially as in (70), yielding an equivalent final translation.

At s-slrUcture, however, the bracketed VP small clause in (80a) is not extracted, but remains in situ: (80) a. John could [t; help his father] and Bill should e;. b. [t; help his father]; [John; could t; and Bill should ea s-stTllclllre IF As it stands, the S-SlrUcture (80a) is uninterpretable, since the base-generated empty node (e;) introduces a stored variable which cannot be bound. Any ILF based on this structure will therefore violate the STORE FILTER (cf. (61». However, argument raising at LF may extract the bracketed VP small clause, in an acrossthe-board fashion, yielding the LF (80b).

3SO Juunaj told hisj father about himselfj. In general, the binding of these elements in Inuit is subject-oriented and need not be local. 37 To capture their parallel behaviour, I propose that both kinds of elements must satisfy the extended binding condition given in (86) (cf. Chomsky 1980, 1981 and Barss 1986, on A-binding, and Jeanne 1978, Finer 1985, and Bittner and Hale 1993, on obviation as an A'-counterpart of A-binding). ) A reflexive element is bound by an accessible subject path. , distinguished adjunct); (ii) for any aj, 2 S j S n, aj immediately dominates aj_l; (iii) for any aj, 3 S j S n, aj is in an extended projection with a2, or with an extension ofal which has no subject.

Download PDF sample

Rated 4.31 of 5 – based on 6 votes