Pottsian LFG

Potts (2005) provides an elegant and influential approach to the syntax and semantics of a wide range of 'parenthetical' constructions, including various kinds of supplementals/appositives and expressives, which have not received much attention in the LFG literature. The prospect of wholesale importation of Pottsian analyses for such constructions is appealing. However, there are (as Potts himself notes) problems with his approach from a resource sensitive perspective, such as is often assumed in LFG approaches to the syntax semantics interface. Potts sketches, but does not develop, a way of overcoming these problems. In this paper we attempt to develop his proposal and explore ways in which it can be implemented in the architecture of LFG. For exemplification, we focus on supplemental ('appositive', non-restrictive) relative clauses in English. A side effect of our discussion is thus a proposal for an LFG analysis of this construction, which appears to have been neglected hitherto

Restrictive Relative Clauses in Maltese

This paper provides a descriptive overview of restrictive relative clauses (henceforth RRCs) in Maltese, a construction which has received little atten- tion to date and which is poorly described in existing grammars. We outline an LFG approach to the facts we describe bulding on existing LFG work on relatives. Further we explore some issues raised by Maltese for approaches to resumption

On the analysis of non-selected datives in Maltese

This paper provides a descriptive overview of extra-argumental or non-selected datives in Maltese, poorly described in existing grammars. We outline an LFG approach to the facts we describe building on existing LFG work and in particular on Kibort (2008)?s approach to dative arguments, extending her approach to the various subclasses of non-selected dative arguments

Resource Splitting and Reintegration with Supplementals

In this paper we survey the various ways of expressing modality in Urdu/Hindi and show that Urdu/Hindi modals provide interesting insights on current discussions of the semantics of modality. There are very few dedicated modals in Urdu/Hindi: most of which has been arrived at constructionally via a combination of a certain kind of verb with a certain kind of embedded verb form and a certain kind of case. Among the range of constructions yielded by such combinations, there is evidence for a two-place modal operator in addition to the one-place operator usually assumed in the literature. We also discuss instances of the Actuality Entailment, which had been shown to be sensitive to aspect, but in Urdu/Hindi appears to be sensitive to aspect only some of the time, depending on the type of modal verb. Indeed, following recent proposals by Ramchand (2011), we end up with a purely lexical account of modality and the Actuality Entailment, rather than the structural one put forward by Hacquard (2010)

Affected experiencers and mixed semantics in LFG/Glue

Bosse, Bruening and Yamada (2012) (BBY) provides a study of several constructions involving ?non-selected? arguments, and outlines an approach to the syntax and semantics of one such construction: the Affected Experiencer (AE) construction. The syntactic analysis relies on abstract functional projections and particular assumptions about configurational syntax. We show how an account may be given without these syntactic assumptions. Semantically, BBY argue that AEs may contribute both at issue content and conventional implicatures, which raises interesting issues for the approach of e.g. Potts (2005). We explore some consequences of their semantic analysis and show that it faces a number of difficulties

NP would like to meet GF: A Welsh Adjectival Construction

In this article we examine a Welsh adjectival construction which superficially looks simple but on closer examination proves to be somewhat challenging. The construction contains an NP constituent whose GF status is far from clear. We consider various analyses of this NP, as SUBJ, OBJ, and ADJ, and suggest that on balance the evidence favours the OBJ analysis. Beyond the purely parochial Welsh or Celtic interest, it may provide a useful case study of how difficult it is to determine the correct identification of grammatical functions beyond core cases

From juxtaposition to incorporation: an approach to Generic-Specific constructions

In this paper, we present an analysis of classifier noun incorporation in Gunwinyguan languages from northern Australia, focussing particularly on generic-specific constructions. We show how the analysis of Sadler and Nordlinger (2006) for generic-specific constructions formed through nominal juxtaposition can be extended to account for incorporated generic-specific constructions also. In this analysis, each nominal (or incorporated noun) is treated as belonging to a set at f-structure, on a par with the standard LFG treatment of coordination. The difference between the various set-based constructions (including coordinations, generic-specific constructions and part-whole constructions) arises in the mapping to the semantic structure. We show how this provides a single unified analysis for all generic-specific constructions in these languages, whether incorporated or juxtaposed. In doing so, we provide the first LFG analysis of classifier incorporation with doubling

Negation in Modern Standard Arabic: An LFG approach

Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) uses five different particles to express sentential negation: the invariant particle maa, the particle laa and its tensed counterparts lam (PAST) and lan (FUT), and laysa which is marked only for SUBJ agreement. Partial analyses of these elements are offered in other frameworks, notably Minimalism (Shlonsky, 1997; Benmamoun, 2000), but have not to date received an analysis within LFG. We propose an approach to four of these particles: the fifth one, namely maa, raises a number of additional issues and we leave it to one side for reasons of space. laa, lam, lan show distinctions of TENSE, occur only with imperfective forms of the verb (excluding the perfective) and must immediately precede the verb itself. They are limited to occurrence in verbal sentences. We propose that the adjacency requirement follows from the fact that these negative particles are non-projecting words adjoined to the (imperfective) V. On the other hand, laysa is a fully verbal element, and is thus a negative verb, occurring only with present tense interpretation