A Specificity Effect Related to the Discourse Connectivity of Weak Crossover Phenomena
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this paper, I propose that the specificity effect is able to improve or override weak crossover (WCO) phenomena, since [+specific] features associated with D-linking elements overtly move in wh-questions. These crossover configurations have been described in terms of syntactic factors. Postal (1971, 1993) and Wasow (1979) both refer to these kinds of crossover phenomena. Strong Crossover (SCO) violates the crossover principle or Binding Condition C. In contrast, WCO phenomena have remained marginal. The local constraints are not available to explain the variation associated with discourse connectivity, which includes WCO phenomena, or to capture pragmatic variation in context. From the perspective of semantic and pragmatic approaches, I suggest that specificity related to discourse context is able to explain the degree of the grammatical acceptability of wh-phrases in WCO configuration.
Abstract
In this paper, I propose that the specificity effect is able to improve or override weak crossover (WCO) phenomena, since [+specific] features associated with D-linking elements overtly move in wh-questions. These crossover configurations have been described in terms of syntactic factors. Postal (1971, 1993) and Wasow (1979) both refer to these kinds of crossover phenomena. Strong Crossover (SCO) violates the crossover principle or Binding Condition C. In contrast, WCO phenomena have remained marginal. The local constraints are not available to explain the variation associated with discourse connectivity, which includes WCO phenomena, or to capture pragmatic variation in context. From the perspective of semantic and pragmatic approaches, I suggest that specificity related to discourse context is able to explain the degree of the grammatical acceptability of wh-phrases in WCO configuration.
참고문헌 (34)
- Bresnan, Joan, "Formal Issues in Lexical-Functional Grammar", pp.241~274 (1995), CSLI
- Chierchia, Gennaro, "Questions with Quantifiers", Natural Language Semantics, 1, pp.81~234 (1993)
- Chomsky, Noam, "Conditions on Rules in Grammar", Linguistic Analysis, 2, pp.303~351 (1976)
- Chomsky, Noam, "Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding" (1982), MIT Press
- Cinque, Guglielmo, "Types of A’-Dependencies" (1990), MIT Press
- Diesing, Molly, "Indefinites" (1992), MIT Press
- Enc, Mürvet, "The Semantics of Specificity", Linguistic Inquiry, 22(1), pp.1~25 (1991)
- Falco, Michelangelo, "Towards a D-type Theory of Specificity", Workshop: Specificity from Theoretical and Empirical Points of View (2010)
- Heim, Irene, "The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases" (1988), Garland
- Higginbotham, James, "Pronouns and Bound Variables", Linguistic Inquiry, 11, pp.679~708 (1980)
- Hofmeister, Philip, "Representational Complexity and Memory Retrieval in Language Comprehension", Ph. D., pp.2007
- Hofmeister, Philip, "Cognitive Constraints and Island Effects", Language, 86, pp.366~415 (2010)
- Jacobs, Joachim, "Intonationsforschung", pp.89~134 (1988), Niemeyer. Max Niemeyer
- Keenan, Edward, "Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar", Linguistic Inquiry, 8, pp.63~99 (1977)
- Kaplan, Ronald, "The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations" (1982), MIT Press
- Koopman, Hilda, "Variables and the Bijection Principle", The Linguistic Review, 2, pp.139~160 (1982)
- Kratzer, Angelika, "Handbook of Semantics", pp.825~834 (1991), De Gruyter
- Lasnik, Howard, "Weakest Crossover", Linguistic Inquiry, 22, pp.687~720 (1991)
- Lasnik, Howard, "The Wiley Blackwell Companion to Syntax", pp.1~27 (2017), John Wiley and Sons
- May, Robert, "Logical Form" (1985), MIT Press
- Nadathur, Prerna, "Weak Crossover and the Direct Association Hypothesis", Proceedings of the LFG13 Conference, pp.461~481 (2013)
- Pesetsky, David, "The Representation of (In)definiteness", pp.98~129 (1987), MIT Press
- Postal, Paul, "Cross-Over Phenomena" (1971), Holt, Rinehart and Winston
- Postal, Paul, "Remarks on Weak Crossover Effects", Linguistic Inquiry, 24, pp.539~556 (1993)
- Reinhart, Tanya, "Anaphora and Semantic Interpretation" (1983), Croom Helm
- Reinhart, Tanya, "Quantifier-Scope", Linguistics and Philosophy, 4(20), pp.335~397 (1997)
- Rizzi, Louis, "Semantic Interfaces: Reference, Anaphora and Aspect", pp.145~176 (2001), CSLI
- Rooth, Mats, "Association with Focus", Ph.D., pp.1985
- Rooth, Mats, "A Theory of Focus Interpretation", Natural Language Semantics, 1, pp.75~116 (1992)
- Ross, John, "Constraints on Variables in Syntax", Ph.D., pp.1967
- Safir, Ken, "Multiple Variable Binding", Linguistic Inquiry, 15(4), pp.603~638 (1984)
- Tomioka, Satoshi, "Pragmatics of Lf Intervention Effects : Japanese and Korean Wh-Interrogatives", Journal of Pragmatics, 39(9), pp.1570~1590 (2007)
- Wasow, Thomas, "Anaphoric Relations in English", Ph.D., pp.1972
- Wasow, Thomas, "Weak Crossover and Informativity" (2011), CSLI