4 years ago

Structural analogy in language and its limits [Contrast and analogy v.2]

Structural analogy in language and its limits [Contrast and analogy v.2]

John Anderson 8 iar from

John Anderson 8 iar from studies on dependency grammar; the version given here is as formulated in Anderson (1986a: 70): (17) head convention A regularity that mentions the head of a construction is interpreted as invoking the construction as a whole unless a subordinate of the head is mentioned by the same instance of that regularity This means that we can attribute to the relevant segments in help the structure in (18.a) which differentiates in a familiar way between complement and adjunct, while (18.b) illustrates the structure for an intransitive centre with an adjunct, such as that in keep: (18) a. {V} | {V/{C}} {C\{V}} : : : {C} : : : : : : : e + l + p b. {V} | {V} {C\{V}} : : : : i: + p (Henceforth in such graphs, I shall suppress the verticals around V, in the cause of simplicity of presentation.) /p/ might be said to involve what we might refer to as ‘retrocomplementation’, and as such instantiates an adjunct rather than a complement. It introduces a node of the same category as specified to the left of ‘\’ in its representation, above the original node. In this way we recognise that the head determines the basic syntax of the construction; it is another property of heads to accept adjuncts (as well as to require complements, and to characterise the construction). Syllables containing such adjuncts are referred to by Hall (2001) as ‘superheavy syllables’, with a distribution that is more restricted than that associated with adjunct-free syllables (provided one syllabifies onsetmaximally). These clusters of course are regulated also by sonority sequencing, and this limits the possible combinations. In addition, /N/ is an exception to (16), as formulated in (19.b): (19) a. */VCN/, */V:N/ b. /N/ ⇒ ∼ (16) /N/ is always a complement in English. Thus the distribution of /ŋ/ reflects the complement/adjunct distinction, which is a formal rather than an interface property. Let us return to the ‘appendices’ illustrated by (13). These are not sequenced in accordance with sonority. But they seem to represent a higher-level adjunct of a rather spe-

9 Structural analogy in language, and its limits cific category, namely ‘coronal obstruent’. They introduce the extra structure in (20), compared with (18): (20) a. {V} | {V} {cor,obs\{V}} | : {V/{C}} {C\{V}} : : : : : {C} : : : : : : : : : : e + l + p + s b. {V} | {V} {cor,obs\{V}} | : {V} {C\{V}} : : : : : : : i: + p + s (I am not concerned with the characterisation of ‘coronal obstruent’, which labelling here has simply the status of a cover term. It involves a specification which is a combination of primary and secondary category) Here, however, the sequencing with respect to the other consonants is, of course, not accorded in conformity with relative sonority, and the ‘appendix’ is sequenced by relative sonority only with respect to the vowel, as in the lexical representation for clamps in (21), involving partial non-sequencing (recall (3)): (21) a. a, k, l b. a + m, a + p, a + s or as in (21)’, with total non-sequencing (recall (6)): (21)’ k, l (p, s, m, a) Linearisation of the ‘appendix’ with respect to the other consonants must apparently be part of the specification of the adjunction itself, as given, in a provisional form, in (22): (22) {cor,obs} ⇒ + { \{|V|}}*, in environment {C} This is what the ‘+s’ notation in (20) is intended to express. We should note finally here that the asterisk in (22) indicates that (22) is recursive, allowing for examples like (23): (23) a. acts, widths, sixth, text b. sixths, texts Recursion seems to be restricted to adjunction of the voiceless coronal obstruents, a restriction I have not built in. But I am principally interested here in the characterisation in prin-

Contrast in phonology, structural analogy, and the interfaces
Structural analogy and universal grammar
Structural Realism: Continuity and Its Limits - Ioannis Votsis
1 Finegan, Edward, Language. Its Structure and Use. 3rd edition ...
The Structure and Content of the Body of an OLIF v.2 File
Correlation Between Structure of Bcl-2 and Its Inhibitory Function of ...
Correlation Between Structure of Bcl-2 and Its Inhibitory Function of ...