Napoli, Donna Jo

English

Works

Swarthmore College Works Linguistics Faculty Works Linguistics 12-1-1993 Review Of "Syntax And The Lexicon" By T. Stowell And E. Wehrli Donna Jo Napoli Swarthmore College, dnapoli1@swarthmore.edu This work is brought to you for free and open access by . It has been accepted for inclusion in Linguistics Faculty Works by an authorized administrator of Works. For more information, please contact myworks@swarthmore.edu. Follow this and additional works at: https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-linguistics  Part of the Linguistics Commons Let us know how access to these works benefits you  Recommended Citation Donna Jo Napoli. (1993). "Review Of "Syntax And The Lexicon" By T. Stowell And E. Wehrli". Language. Volume 69, Issue 4. 876-877. DOI: 10.2307/416934 https://works.swarthmore.edu/fac-linguistics/144   Linguistic Society of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Language.http://www.jstor.orgLinguistic Society of AmericaReview Author(s): Donna Jo Napoli Review by: Donna Jo Napoli Source:   Language, Vol. 69, No. 4 (Dec., 1993), pp. 876-877Published by:  Linguistic Society of AmericaStable URL:  http://www.jstor.org/stable/416934Accessed: 21-07-2015 13:57 UTCYour use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jspJSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.This content downloaded from 130.58.65.20 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:57:24 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsLANGUAGE, VOLUME 69, NUMBER 4 (1993) ('Diglossia', Word 15.325-40, 1959) as charac- terizing diglossia: compared to CC, LC has su- perior prestige, possesses a long literary heritage, is standardized, has a more complex grammar and a more discriminating lexicon, and the position of the two varieties has been stable for at least 150 years. Nevertheless, according to the authors, the Czech case cannot be con- sidered a classic diglossia: the difference be- tween CC and LC does not prevent less educated speakers from understanding LC with- out first studying it, and as to function, even professional conversations may be and are car- ried on in CC. As a distinct variety, CC was recognized and briefly described by Bohuslav Havranek in the mid-1930s, and it received increased attention after the war. And it may be of interest to note that many studies of spoken Czech have been published outside the home country; examples are those by Louise B. Hammer (e.g. Prague colloquial Czech: A case study in code-switch- ing, Indiana University dissertation, 1985), Henry Kucera (e.g. The phonology of Czech, The Hague: Mouton, 1961), and Charles E. Townsend (e.g. A description of spoken Prague Czech, Columbus, OH: Slavica, 1990). Part of the reason is that foreigners who wish to un- derstand spoken Czech and speak it informally must become familiar with its structure. Variation in language is a competent work written for specialists. It would therefore not be of much use to anyone needing to gain a prac- tical knowledge of CC. The manuscript was completed in 1988, but the book did not appear until 1992, three years after the change in gov- ernment. Even so, the authors state in the Pref- ace (dated May 1990) that they 'prefer to publish the text without any modifications, i.e. in the wording formulated before the political change' (vi). Whether or not such modifications would have been extensive, the authors should have justified their stated preference. The text is ap- pended by notes to chapters (256-304), sample dialogues collected by LOUISE HAMMER in 1985 (305-21), references (322-58), and indexes. [ZDENEK SALZMANN, Northern Arizona Univ'er- sity.] Syntax and the lexicon. Ed. by TIM STOWELL and ERIC WEHRLI. (Syn- tax and semantics, 26.) San Diego: Academic Press, 1992. Pp. xii, 298. Paper $45.00. These articles are the result of a workshop held at UCLA in winter, 1988, for the purpose of gathering together prominent scholars work- ing on the lexicon in its relation to the syntax in an attempt to explore major theoretical con- troversies. Following the editors' 'Introduction' (1-8), TIM STOWELL'S 'The role of the lexicon in syn- tactic theory' (9-20) outlines predicate-argu- ment structure (discussing alignment principles for mapping 0-roles into structural positions, and problems for such principles), theories of the structure of the lexicon (with focus on the morphology and syntax interfaces), and a se- lection of lexical rules that affect argument structure. We then turn to two articles on the debate over whether syntactic NP movement exists. ADRIANA BELLETTI, in Agreement and case in past participle clauses in Italian' (21-44), argues for a movement rule that affects the alignment of 0-roles and structural positions. JOAN BRESNAN & JONNI M. KANERVA, in 'Locative inversion in Chichewa: A case study of factor- ization in grammar' (53-102), argue that these inversion constructions are best analyzed with- out movement by recognizing that a phrase can have dual status-for example as topic and sub- ject (as the PP does), or as object and discourse focus (as the postverbal NP does). Tim Stowell comments on Belletti, showing how her analysis calls for syntactic movement in passives. PAUL SCHACHTER comments on Bresnan & Kanerva, challenging their version of the thematic hier- archy and the analysis of the PP as a subject. Bresnan & Kanerva respond to Schachter. Two other articles deal with the relationship of lexical argument structure to syntactic struc- ture. MALKA RAPPAPORT HOVAV & BETH LEVIN, in '-er nominals: Implications for the theory of argument structure' (127-54), argue that agen- tive formation is sensitive to the presence of an external argument in the predicate-argument structure of the verb (the root of the agentive), but not to any particular 0-role. They say this supports their claim that 0-roles are not anno- tated in predicate-argument structure. RAY JACKENDOFF, in 'Babe Ruth homered his way into the hearts of America' (155-78), argues that the syntactic form of the way construction re- verses the hierarchical relation between the conceptual main V and manner V, and that this is captured by mapping rules from conceptual into syntactic structure. ALEC MARANTZ com- ments on Jackendoff, giving an alternative anal- 876 This content downloaded from 130.58.65.20 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:57:24 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and ConditionsBOOK NOTICES ysis in which the direct object measures out the action it denotes, so that Jackendoff's mapping rules are not needed. The final two articles concern binding theory and its relation to predicate-argument structure. EDWIN WILLIAMS ('0-Theory as Binding The- ory', 189-210) argues that 0-roles are involved in binding relations. For example, when a V 0- marks its object, it coindexes the external and internal 0-roles, so the first binds the second. MARIA LUISA ZUBIZARRETA, in The lexical en- coding of scope relations among arguments' (21 1-58), proposes that scope relations between arguments are set at a certain lexical structure level and preserved in syntactic structure. KYLE JOHNSON comments on Zubizarreta, challenging her theory and claiming that syntactic structure is the key to the scope dependency. While no consensus was reached (nor should have been, given the developments in the con- troversies since then), the original goal of the workshop, as reflected in this volume, was ad- mirably met. [DONNA Jo NAPOLI, Swearthrnore College.] Speech perception, production and lin- guistic structure. Ed. by YOH'ICHI TOHKURA, ERIK VATIKIOTIS- BATESON, and YOSHINORI SAGISAKA. Burke, VA: IOS Press (Tokyo: Ohmsha), 1992. Pp. xiv, 463. Cloth 8,800 Yen. These papers were presented in Japan in No- vember, 1990, at a workshop coinciding with the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. This volume will appeal most strongly to psycholinguists and phoneticians. The number of papers dealing with Japanese will please anyone concerned that our theories are biased towards English. The book is divided into two parts-twelve chapters on perception and nine on production and linguistic struc- ture-and the chapters are arranged in six sections, each concluded by one to four commentaries. There is no general introduction. In the first section, 'Contextual effects in vowel perception', SUMI SHIGENO (3-20) and MASATO AKAGI (63-78) investigate the influence of categorical membership and temporal prox- imity in the perception of similar sounds. ROBERT ALLEN Fox (21-42) argues that knowl- edge of a language's morphophonemic rules af- fects perception, and CAROLINE B. HUANG (43- 62) shows the importance of vowel trajectories in distinguishing similar vowels. The second section is 'Perceptual normaliza- tion of talker differences'. TATSUYA HIRAHARA & HIROAKI KATO (89-1 12) look at the role of F, in vowel normalization; HOWARD C. NUSBAUM & TODD M. MORIN (113-34) suggest that we use two different techniques for normalizing, de- pending on the amount of variability in what we hear. The papers in the third section, on 'Percep- tion and learning of non-native language', ad- dress the questions stated by Howard C. Nusbaum & LEE LISA (265-74): 'Why is it so easy for children to learn the sounds of their native language'? Why is it so difficult for adults to learn the phonology of a new language?' REIKO A. YAMADA & YOH'ICHI TOHKURA (155- 74) and SCOTT E. LIVELY, DAVID B. PISONI, & JOHN S. LOGAN (175-96) focus on Japanese speakers' difficulties in distinguishing English Irn and /1/. WINIFRED STRANGE (197-220) re- views recent research on the effect of language instruction on adults' perception of nonnative contrasts. JACQUES MEHLER & ANNE CHRISTOPHE (221-8) bring the area of language acquisition into the discussion of perception; they believe that, 'although there is a universal basis to language acquisition. the acquisition it- self is different for different languages'. For me, the most interesting paper was by PATRICIA K. KUHL (239-64), who shows that, within the first six months of life, a child has formed a primitive representation of the vowel system of the lan- guage it is hearing. The second part of the book, on 'Speech pro- duction and linguistic structure', is introduced by two papers. JOHN J. OHALA (297-312) comes at the issues from an unexpected angle, relating the methodology of spoken language research to that of historical linguistics. HIROYA FuJISAKI (313-28) presents a quantitative model of the production of pitch contours. In the section 'Articulatory studies', KEVIN G. MUNHALL, J. RANDALL FLANAGAN, & DAVID J. OSTRY (329-40) propose two- (as opposed to one-) dimensional measurement of articulatory activities. ERIK VATIKIOTIS-BATESON & JANET FLETCHER (341-58) consider the complexity of effects on prosody, and MARY E. BECKMAN & JAN EDWARDS (359-76) investigate different mechanisms of lengthening and stress. In the final section, 'Acoustic studies', NOBUYOSHI KAIKI & YOSHINORI SAGISAKA (391-402) and NICK CAMPBELL (403-18) exam- 877 This content downloaded from 130.58.65.20 on Tue, 21 Jul 2015 13:57:24 UTCAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Review Of  Syntax And The Lexicon  By T. Stowell And E. Wehrli

https://works.swarthmore.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1143&amp;context=fac-linguistics

Review Of Syntax And The Lexicon By T. Stowell And E. Wehrli

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Works