Problematyka opisu peryfrastycznej predykacji : między słowem a obrazem

W artykule rozważa się wybrane problemy opisu złożonych znaków predykacji (complex predicates, CPred) - m.in. ciągle kontrowersyjne problemy kryteriów ich wyróżniania i typologii, statusu w systemie leksykalno-gramatycznym oraz stosunku do pełnoznacznych jednostek (syntetycznych) z klasy verbum. CPred są interesujące również dlatego, że obserwowano je w wielu różnych językach (np. ros. ispytywat'' voschiščenije, pol. mieć // odczuwać podziw // zachwyt = zachwycać się, ang. to feel admiration (for); ros. polučit’ pomošč (+ot kogo) = otrzymać // dostać pomoc (od kogo) = to receive help (from sb.); zaviazywat’ družbu - zawrzeć, nawiązać przyjaźń = zaprzyjaźnić się; ang. to strike up a friendship, etc.). Skłania to do ponownego poszukiwania kompleksowych rozwiązań, korzystając także z nowszych ofert lingwistyki. Szczególnie kognitywna teza o prototypowej naturze kategorii gramatyczno-leksykalnych pozwala traktować Cpred jako typologicznie zróżnicowaną sferę znaków złożonych (o różnym stopniu utrwalenia) z klasy VERBUM, ujmowanej jako kategoria gradacyjna i policentryczna. Można wtedy wskazywać kilka typów (modeli strukturalnych) Cpred, różniących się strukturą, składem leksykalnym, stopniem "związania" znaczeń składników, a w efekcie: treścią globalną takich wyrażeń (jednostek z peryferyjnej strefy czasowników): 1) [ VCOP + NKONKR // Nabstr // Adj // Adv] 2) [ VMOD+ VINF] + ... (orzeczenia modalne) 3) [VFAZ +V // NA] + ... (orzeczenia fazowe) 4) [VGENER + NA // NE // Nabstr] + ... (orzeczenia analityczne właściwe) 5) [VMETAF // METAPRED + Nabstr // NA // NE ] + ... (orzeczenia peryfrastyczne jako część frazeologii werbalnej.The article discusses selected problems connected with description of complex predicates (CPred), i.a., the still controversial issue of criteria applied to diff erentiate and classify elements of this category, their status in lexical-grammatical system and their relationship with synthetic entities belonging to the class of VERBUM. What makes CPreds interesting is the fact that they have been encountered in various languages (e.g. ispytywat''voschiščenije (Russian) = mieć // odczuć podziw // zachwyt (Polish) = to feel admiration (for) (English); polučat’ pomošč (Russian) = otrzymać // dostać pomoc (Polish) = to receive help (from sb) (English); zaviazywat' družbu (Russian) = nawiązać przyjaźń // zaprzyjaźnić się (Polish) = to strike up a friendship // to become friends (English), etc.). This situation calls for a search for complex solutions, also with the aid of new linguistic theories. Especially the cognitivist thesis about the prototypical character of lexical-grammatical categories allows to classify Cpreds as a typologically diversifi ed group of complex entities (characterised by varied degrees of fixedness) functioning within the class of VERBUM understood as a gradated and polycentric category. Such an approach allows for diff erentiation of several types (structural models) of Cpreds, i.e. entities representing a peripheral group of verbs and diff ering with respect to structure, lexical composition and degree of ‘fi xedness’ of their meanings, and, as a result, with respect to their global content: 1) [VCOP + NKONKR // Nabstr // Adj // Adv] (standard nominal predicates); 2) [VMOD+ VINF] + ... (modal predicates); 3) [VFAZ +V // NA] + ... (phase-aspectual predicates); 4) [VGENER + NA // NE // Nabstr] + ... (verbo-nominal analytisms); 5) [VMETAF // METAPRED + Nabstr // NA // NE ] + ... (periphrastic predicates as part of verbal phraseology)

Developmental stages challenging cross-linguistic transfer: L2 acquisition of Norwegian adjectival agreement in attributive and predicative contexts

This study presents cross-sectional data on adjectival agreement in second-language (L2) learners of Norwegian with four different first languages (L1s). The target language has full noun phrase agreement between article, adjective and noun, and the source languages represent different agreement conditions, similar to or different from the target language. Sixteen learners participated in the study, and their oral production of adjective agreement was analysed individually. Two hypotheses were proposed. First, learners will develop adjectival agreement in a piecemeal way and follow the developmental stages predicted by Processability Theory (Pienemann, 1998), with attributive and predicative agreement implicationally ordered. Second, learners with adjective agreement in the L1 will transfer that into the L2, whereas learners without agreement in the L1 will not use agreement. Under the first hypothesis, we expect the learners to be distributed along a developmental scale, with some learners applying agreement in attributive positions only and others applying agreement in both the attributive and predicative positions. Under the second hypothesis, we anticipate a difference between the groups: Learners with agreement in their L1 will mark agreement in all contexts where it occurs in the L1, whereas learners who do not have agreement in their L1 will fail to mark agreement overall. The comparison demonstrates larger differences within the L1 groups than between the L1 groups. This suggests a gradual acquisition of agreement, with the agreement features and positions emerging one by one rather than being transferred from the L1.publishedVersio

The Syntax of Copular Clauses in Arabic

Copular clauses in several languages have received much attention in recent years, however in Arabic they have been largely overlooked. In general, copular clauses have been classified into four types: the predicational clause, the specificational clause, the identificational clause, and the identity clause. This thesis aims to characterize and analyze the various copular clause types in Arabic, and goes further to discuss the taxonomic status of the copular clause with a postcopular definite description and the nature of the pronominal element (PE) in Arabic copular clauses. The thesis then explores the predicational clause type in more depth, focusing specifically on the copula KWN, the subject NP, and agreement and case in this type of copular clause. I provide an analysis of Arabic copular clauses that condenses the four types of copular clauses into just two types: the predicational clause and the identity clause, which differ in the small clause they contain. The specificational clause, the identificational clause, and the clause with a postcopular definite description can all be considered subtypes of the identity clause. I claim that the PE, which appears in all Arabic copular clauses except the predicational clause, is a realization of the F head in the structure of the identity clause, and cannot be used in a predicational clause due to the presence of predicative expressions in this type of clause. I also claim that Arabic has a single copula KWN, which originates in the vP, however in the structure of the Arabic verbless sentence this vP does not project. Next, I suggest that the definiteness constraint on the subject of Arabic predicational clauses follows from the referentiality and topicality requirements on the subject of a predicational clause. Finally, I provide an analysis for case and agreement in the predicational copular clause which suggests that the nominative case on subjects and their predicates in verbless sentences is obtained via Multiple Agree with T, whereas the accusative case on subjects and their predicates in clauses involving the copular verb results from Multiple Agree with v. However, the case on subjects may change in the course of a derivation by other mechanisms, such as presence of the complementizer ʔinna or by cyclic agreement

Syntactic Features of Proper Names: The Generativist Approach(es) to Properhood

The paper presents an overview of the generativist approaches to the syntactic analysis of proper names which are only very little known in the field of onomastics. The authors start with the general outline of basic theoretical ideas of generative grammar pertaining to the syntactic nature of words and phrases, the nature of the determiner phrase, and the main issues of transformational semantic syntax. The authors further proceed to present the cornerstone theories related to proper names within the generativist paradigm: Giuseppe Longobardi’s idea of proper names as determiner phrase projections, followed by Hagit Borer who elaborated a detailed analysis of nominal functional sequences; Ora Matushansky’s analysis of constructions of naming and nominating, and its critique by Alexandra Cornilescu. The overview leads the authors to conclude that, although generativism does not offer a unified syntactic theory of proper names, in some respects it can be a more promising theoretical framework than constructivism which now constitutes the basis for the modern “pragmatic” theory of properhood. Unlike constructivism, generativism considers proper names as a part of universal grammar seeking for explanations that would have crosslinguistic relevance. However, the approaches discussed in this paper clearly demonstrate the contribution of the syntactic environment to the interpretation of a noun as a proper or common name, which is a strong argument in favour of the “pragmatic” theory of properhood. The authors show that the generativist framework may also be used in the future for creating a more comprehensive description of some specifically proprial syntactic constructions.Настоящая статья представляет собой обзор малоизвестных среди ономастов подходов к синтаксическому анализу имен собственных, сложившихся в рамках генеративной грамматики. В начале статьи авторы излагают основные идеи генеративной грамматики, связанные с синтаксической природой слов и фраз, статусом группы детерминатора, а также обсуждают основные вопросы трансформационного семантического синтаксиса. Затем авторы представляют ключевые генеративные теории, относящиеся к изучению имен собственных, а именно: концепцию Джузеппе Лонгобарди об именах собственных как проекции группы детерминатора, развитую позднее Хагит Борер, которая разработала более детальный подход к описанию функциональной структуры именных групп; анализ конструкций именования и назначения, предложенный Орой Матушански, а также критику этого подхода в работах Александры Корнилеску. Обзор позволяет авторам заключить, что хотя генеративизм не предлагает целостной теории имен собственных, в ряде отношений он может обеспечить даже более многообещающую методологию для анализа синтаксических свойств имен собственных, чем конструктивизм, который сегодня составляет основу современной «прагматической» теории проприальности. В противоположность конструктивизму генеративизм рассматривает имена собственные как часть универсальной грамматики, пытаясь найти объяснения, одинаково хорошо работающие для разных языков. Рассмотренные в статье подходы однозначно показывают значение синтаксического окружения для проприальной или апеллятивной интерпретации существительного, что само по себе является сильным аргументом в пользу прагматической теории проприальности. Авторы также показывают, что генеративизм может в будущем выступить хорошим теоретическим фундаментом для более детального описания некоторых специфических проприальных синтаксических конструкций

Mediating between Incompatible Tagsets

Proceedings of the Workshop on Annotation and Exploitation of Parallel Corpora AEPC 2010. Editors: Lars Ahrenberg, Jörg Tiedemann and Martin Volk. NEALT Proceedings Series, Vol. 10 (2010), 53-62. © 2010 The editors and contributors. Published by Northern European Association for Language Technology (NEALT) http://omilia.uio.no/nealt . Electronically published at Tartu University Library (Estonia) http://hdl.handle.net/10062/15893

The syntax of slavic predicate case

In this article I provide a syntactic framework for case patterns found in Slavic secondary predicates

Graph based System Purpose - Built for Automatic Retrieval and Extraction of the Electronics Data

International audienceThe work presented in this paper concerns automatic information retrieval and extraction in precise field of electronics based on linguistic knowledge. The extraction and the filtering of data is carried out automatical ly by methods based on the construction of local grammar. To carry out an automatic search for the events in the corpus, a linguistic base, for example the base of the graphs, was created. A comparison of methods is given