The structure of the argument Evidence from Polish: Argument 1 Predication from within a PP and Case assignment with Numeral Phrases • Certain raising verbs in Polish selects PPs whose predicate-phrasal Przepiorkowski (2000) daughters structure-share their subj specifications with the synsem values of the selecting verbs’ object NP complements. Course on “Locality of grammatical relations” Bob Levine and Detmar Meurers (Ohio State University) • The linkage between this NP complement and the subj specification the Scandinavian Summer School on Constraint-Based Grammar P’s predicative complement would be simple to state by familiar devices Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway if the P in such cases could be analyzed as a raising item itself, i.e., if 6.–11. August 2001 3 Major claims (1) VP V PP NP h D E i � � � � comps 1 NP, PP subj 1 subj 1 . . . P XP � subj . . . • Data from Polish strongly support the presence of arg-st specifications on phrasal � 1 � � subj 1 comps | first | subj 1 categories. . . . • The presence of a arg-st specification on phrasal signs may vary from language to za language; • and within a single language, a non-null arg-st specification may be present in one were the relevant structure; class of phrases and absent in another. • The propagation of arg-st specifications though phrasal signs is no less restrictive than • but this is precluded for two reasons: allowing lexical complements, which gives access to the valence of such complements (or, equivalently, the arg-st lists of these complements). – raising prepositions are two-place predicates, which countenance a certain pattern of anaphora that nonraising prepositions, which are one- place selectors, do not, and the Ps in the relevant Polish constructions pattern with one-, not two-place selectors. 2 4
Inferences – If za were a raising preposition, i.e. the head of a predicative PP, such PPs would display the distribution of other predicative categories, but they do not. Therefore they are optimally analyzed as nonpredicative (one-place) predicates, and cannot support the transfer of information exhibited in (1). • In both cases, information about one constituent that must be accessible to another constituent is formally inaccessible because of the removal of the necessary information from the relevant valence list as part of ordinary phrasal combinatorics. • Therefore some record of the required information must persist up the relevant level of phrasal structure, and this information, in Przepi´ orkowski’s view, can only be obtained from the arg-st list, assuming that the standard HPSG feature-matching principles are left intact. 5 7 Argument 2 Predication from within a PP Data: Case matching between quantifier phrases and the predicate adjectives that (2) Uwa˙ za� lem go za szczerego. agree with them requires that both heads and valents in such phrases be visible to these adjectives, but such visibility is precluded by the HPSG I considered him acc as sincere acc saturation mechanism. ‘I considered him to be sincere.’ Uwa˙ za� lem go za studenta. I considered him acc as student acc ‘I considered him to be a student.’ Analysis: • uwa˙ za´ c ( consider ): object-to-subject raising verb But za cannot be a raising preposition as in (2). 6 8
Why za is not a raising preposition Why za is not a raising preposition (cont’d) • In both post-copula and exclamative contexts (analagous to English examples such as Rocco in danger??! What a horrible thought! ), PPs can appear freely, but only if they • In Polish anaphors can only be bound by subjects; are predicative, e.g., w domu : (5) Janek jest w domu/*za szczerego • nonetheless, examples such as the following are permitted: John is at home/as sincere ‘John is at home/*as sincere’ (3) Nie mo˙ zna przcecie˙ z po� lo˙ zy´ c ksia˙ zki i na sobie ? i samej • But as (5) shows, za szczerego cannot appear in postcopula position (nor can it appear Not may but lay book fem on self Emph fem as a predicate in exclamatives). ‘But it is impossible to lay a book on itself.’ • These facts preclude not only treating za as a predicative (i.e., two place) head, but also as treating it as a marker, since in that case za szczerego would be an AP and the Nie mo˙ zna przcecie˙ z po� lo˙ zy´ c ksia˙ zki i na niej ?? i samej head of this AP, Not may but lay book fem on her Emph fem • szczerego, is itself predicative. ‘But it is impossible to lay a book i on it i .’ It follows that za must be a nonpredicative (one-place) selecting head. 9 11 • Therefore prepositions such as na must be understood as taking both AP’s solution subject and complement valents, with (as AP asserts) a raising relation between the complement of po� lo˙ zy´ c , allowing the unrealized subject structure-shared with the higher object to bind the object complement The most straightforward way of dealing with such [raising verb of na . complement] environments is to allow the arg-st of the preposition za to percolate up to the PP[ za ]; once this is allowed, verbs like • But za does not pattern like na , but rather like nonpredicative Ps: uwa˙ za� la´ c and mie´ c (and other similar verbs) may have lexical entries (4) Uwa˙ za� lem go i za siebie ∗ i samego. such as [(6)]...: considered him acc as self Emph masc ‘I really considered him as himself’ 2 word 3 uwa˙ za� la´ c/mie´ c phon Uwa˙ za� lem go i za niego i samego. 6 7 6 7 2 za 3 6 pform 7 * + 6 7 considered him acc as him Emph masc * " # + 6 7 ss | loc | cat | arg-st NP 1 , 0 , PP � 0 � 6 subj 7 (6) 7 6 arg-st 4 5 6 7 2 6 cont 7 ‘I really considered him as himself.’ 6 7 6 7 2 consider 3 6 7 6 7 6 cont considerer 1 7 6 7 • Therefore za is a one-place, nonraising preposition. 4 4 5 5 soa-arg 2 10 12
Case assignment with Numeral Phrases Is there an alternative? • In Polish, predicate adjectives agree with their subject NPs, • Could this agreement pattern reflect a combination of true agreement • except when the subject is a quantifier/numeral phrase: with a kind of default assignment of genitive case to the adjective if the true agreement option isn’t taken? (7) [Kilka drzew] by� lo [wyrwane z ziemi] a few acc trees gen was 3 rd.sg.neut torn acc from earth – No, because if this were a general pattern, it would falsely predict ‘A few tree were uprooted’ that any nominative NP subject could take a predicate adjective with genitive case marking, a prediction contradicted as a matter of course (8) [Kilka drzew] by� lo [wyrwane z ziemi] in simple cases such as * Janek [nom] jest mi� lego [gen] ‘John is nice’, a few acc trees gen was 3 rd.sg.neut torn gen from earth etc. ‘A few tree were uprooted’ • In Polish, there is good evidence that the accusative head of the Numeral/quantifier • Could this agreement pattern then reflect an automatic assignment Phrase is the head. How then can the predicate adjective in (8) gain access to of genitive to the predicate adjective if true agreement with a information about the case of the saturating complement? Numeral/Quantifier Phrase isn’t effected? 13 15 The mechanism of case agreement – No, because in certain registers of Polish, the numerals from dwa ‘two’ to it cztery ‘four’ do not allow the ‘default’ nonagreement genitive assignment: (Te) [acc] czterty [acc] tygodnie [acc] by� lo mordercze [acc]/* morderczych [gen] ‘(These) four weeks were 2 3 word murderous.’ by´ c phon 6 7 6 7 (9) a. 2 3 6 subj 1 7 6 7 # + 6 * " 7 ss | loc | cat | val prd + 6 7 6 7 4 comps XP 5 4 5 � � subj 1 2 category 3 " # prd + 7 6 b. 6 head 7 ⊃ 1 = 2 6 case 1 7 6 7 4 5 D E val | subj � head | case � 2 2 3 category " # 6 prd + 7 7 6 head c. 6 7 case 1 ⊃ � � ∨ � � 6 7 1 = 2 1 = 3 " head | case 6 7 * # + 6 2 7 6 7 val | subj 4 D E 5 � � arg-st NP case 3 14 16
Recommend
More recommend
