Search Results

This chapter turns from the ordering of constituents in the clause to the internal ordering of constituents themselves. In particular, it discusses the position of some frequent adjectives and other modifiers vis-à-vis their nouns.

This chapter looks at noun class and gender systems that are somehow relevant for the proper expression (morphology, syntax, phonology) of noun phrases (NPs) and sentences. The reflection of real and apparent nominal subclasses outside or inside the noun phrase is discussed, along with certain correlations between nouns or referents of NPs on the one hand and constituents outside the NP such as relators (adpositions, case affixes) and the main predicate on the other. Examples are given to show how noun class determines the form of a constituent. Examples from MalakMalak (Australian) illustrate that noun class can also determine the order of constituents. In this language, inalienable nouns (that is, nouns which always require reference to a possessing entity) must follow, whereas alienably possessed nouns must precede, the possessor noun.

This chapter discusses elements that relate to the notion quality in that they specify inherent features of the referent. Cross-linguistically, there are two categories that pertain to such features in the noun phrase (aside from the head noun). One concerns certain dimensional (spatial) features of the property that is designated by the noun: this is the new grammatical category of nominal aspect markers (quality operators). The other category involves lexical elements that typically specify more or less inherent properties of the referent (quality satellites): adjectives. If a language does not have a distinct category of adjectives, it will usually employ qualifying noun phrases (headed by an abstract noun) or relative clauses (headed by a stative or descriptive verb) for this purpose. The chapter shows that the existence of a distinct class of adjectives in a language is closely connected to the kind of noun type that the language employs.

The Principle of Head Proximity is an interpretation of the word order facts in which languages are classified as V-1 (V-initial), SVO, or SOV. There is a general tendency across languages to avoid having adjectives (A) and possessor NPs (G) between the head of the noun phrase (N) and the head of the clause (V). In the V-1 and SOV languages, a possessor NP (G) is only permitted in between heads V and N if an adjective can appear there as well. This chapter discusses languages in which adjectives do not normally appear next to the noun, which runs counter to the first hypothesis formulated on the basis of the Principle of Head Proximity: noun-adjective adjacency. The second hypothesis concerns the position of modifiers relative to the noun.

I outline a unified treatment of descriptive noun phrases: definite, indefinite, universal noun phrases, quantitative phrases like most Fs, phrases featuring any, and noun phrases in the scope of adverbs of generality, like usually or invariably. The analysis does not utilise quantification theory, but is a speech-act analysis in which surface grammar is reflected in logical form.

This chapter deals with constituents of the noun phrase (NP) that specify quantitative properties of the referent: number markers and numerals. The discussion is more on plural markers and not so much with liner distinctions in this domain such as dual, trial, quadral, or paucal number. Cardinal numerals are often grammatical elements but there are also quite a few languages in which cardinality is expressed by means of a construction that involves a lexical element, like a verb or a noun. The chapter also explores the grammatical expression of the notion quantity in the NP (quantity operators), as well as the ways in which this notion is given lexical expression (quantity satellites).

‘Noun phrase’ is used in a broad sense, including nouns, noun phrases proper, and pronouns. Furthermore, attention is paid to the internal structure of adjective phrases. Typical noun phrases consist of a head and a modifier. The function of head can be fulfilled by various constituents, the most frequent being common nouns, but many other categories can be used ‘substantively’, such as adjectives and infinitives. With some nouns a modifier is required (an adnominal argument). All nouns can be modified by one or more optional attributes, the range of which is very wide including adjectives, determiners, quantifiers and others. Noun phrases are either referring or non-referring. Referring noun phrases are either specific or generic, and if specific, either definite or indefinite. In Latin there is often no formal marking corresponding to these distinctions. The traditional category of pronouns contains in reality pronouns proper and determiners, which have very diverse properties.

This book presents a cross-linguistic account of the constituents of the noun phrase (NP), looks at a typologically formal model of the underlying NP structure that is designed to accommodate NPs from any type of natural language, and discusses word order patterns in NPs as they are attested in the languages of the world. Some general properties of NPs are examined and the three notions that are used to characterise most of the noun modifiers — quality, quantity, and location — are introduced. Central notions as nouns, NPs, and referents are also considered, along with the cross-linguistic variation with respect to the internal semantic structure of the NP.

I analyse scope relations between indefinite descriptions, universal noun phrases, and negation. A unified compositional account of any is offered. Relative clause modification, as in Every dog that likes barking, and complexes phrases, such as the friend of every girl, are analysed with ease.

This chapter presents a new model of coreferential noun phrase anaphora processing, JANUS, within the mental models framework. It summarizes previous research on NP anaphora that is most pertinent to JANUS, and outlines two previous attempts to provide an integrated theory of NP anaphora: Centering Theory and Almor's Informational Load Hypothesis. Each has it problems, but the Informational Load Hypothesis is more firmly rooted in psychology, and closer to the JANUS approach. JANUS incorporates many ideas from the Informational Load Hypothesis, but attempts to address its problems. JANUS assumes that the semantic content of an anaphor should be justified by two types of role that the anaphoric expression plays. Backward-looking roles are primarily concerned with identifying the antecedent (and referent) of the anaphor. Forward-looking roles relate to what is to be said about the referent in upcoming discourse. These two types of roles give JANUS its name.

Based on cross‐linguistic differences in the interpretation of genitive constructions, this chapter argues that there are two strategies for interpreting complex nominals: one that relies on sharing a monovalent morphosyntactic definiteness feature, and one that does not; the former is restricted to languages like Hebrew that have a definiteness feature.

This chapter is concerned with the third major modifier category in the noun phrase (NP), localising operators and localising satellites, which relate to locative properties of the referent of the matrix NP. Examples of localising operators in NP are demonstrative pronouns and (in)definite articles, while examples of localising satellites are (localising/identifying) relative clause, possessive modifier, and locative modifier. Each of these constituents typically indicates that the referent of an NP has a place in the world of discourse (or that this place can be inferred). The grammatical expression of the notion location in the NP is discussed by focusing on demonstratives and articles, along with possessive modifiers, adpositional modifiers, and relative clauses.

According to the Principle of Scope, the semantic distance of grammatical and lexical modifiers relative to the head in the underlying structure is iconically reflected in the actual linguistic expression. Modifiers tend to occur next to the part of the expression that they have in their scope. This principle predicts — implicitly — that constituents that are in the scope of a certain modifier (that is, elements that are part of the same layer in the underlying noun phrase structure) are expressed in a continuous sequence. It also predicts — explicitly — that operators and satellites occur immediately before or after the material they have in their scope. This chapter discusses the relative order of modifiers in non-complex noun phrases and the position of embedded modifiers, along with free nominal aspect markers and adjectives. It also examines the relative order of demonstrative, numeral, adjective, and noun in those languages in which the three modifiers are always free, fully integrated constituents of the noun phrase.

This chapter deals with the study of the discourse status of noun phrases occupying a topicalized, left-dislocated, or (in there-sentences) postverbal position, and discusses the connection between the quantitative spread of these patterns and the increase in the range of the discourse functions fulfilled by such noun phrases. Using a corpus of Early Modern and Late Modern English, the variables taken into account are: overall frequencies for topicalization, left-dislocation, and there-sentences; the type of information conveyed by the noun phrases in question; and the anaphoric distance between the noun phrases and their antecedents. The connection between the informative characterization and propagation of the three constructions and the genre(s) in which they are attested are also discussed. In light of the corpus data, which contains samples of both formal writing and speech-based discourse, the chapter assesses whether the unmarked informative functions of the noun phrases occurring in the database examples of topicalization, left-dislocation, and there-sentences are fulfilled more naturally in formal or informal language.

This chapter describes quantifiers related to natural languages with the logically simplest case: type ‹1›. These quantifiers are, on each universe, sets of subsets of that universe. Here the denotations of noun phrases, a fundamental syntactic category in many — if not in all — languages are found, along with a few of the classical logical quantifiers. Among noun phrases are the proper names, which, although they denote individuals, are sometimes conveniently treated as type ‹1› quantifiers as well. Of course, languages that do not have any other noun phrases than pronouns might still have constituents that can be taken to denote type ‹1› quantifiers. But however a natural language may use type ‹1› quantification, if it does at all, this chapter claims that the linguistically important type is ‹1, 1›. Various examples of phrases denoting type ‹1› quantifiers are given. Two fundamental properties of quantifiers, isomorphism closure (ISOM) and extension (EXT), are also discussed.

This chapter considers the influence of a performance mode depicted by Homer — Demodocus the singer surrounded by a dancing circle — upon the phonological and semantic features of Homeric verse. A circle dance is a locus of conjuration and chanted noun-and-epithet phrases, delimited metrically by the turning points of the dance, become uniquely evocative ‘choral signifiers’. Paolo Vivante’s aesthetic theory of these phrases thereby receives a grounding in attested performance practice, although ‘choral theory’ is required to account for both the poetics and the aesthetics of Homeric verse. The effects of a non-linguistic dance rhythm upon Homeric and Hesiodic phonology, morphology, and diction are discussed. It is shown that ‘poetic license’ is a necessary component in an honest analysis of epic usage. Gregory Nagy’s derivation of the hexameter from smaller, later lyric metrical segments is critiqued in light of Pierre Chantraine’s observation that the Greek language is demonstrably maladapted to the hexameter, as is not the case with lyric metres. The choral signifier cannot be reduced to a purely linguistic phenomenon.

I first outline the general theory of proto-referring acts, which is the basis for a unified semantics of noun phrases. I then concentrate on proper names, utilising referential trees, to provide a theory of proper names that is neither direct referentialist nor descriptivist, and which is perfectly neutral on denoting and non-denoting names

This book has presented a cross-linguistic overview of the constituents that together make up the integral noun phrase (NP). Most NP constituents were discussed in some detail, including articles, demonstratives, numerals, adjectives, nouns, adnominal possessor constructions, and relative clauses. The discussion is mainly restricted to lexical NPs which are headed by an underived noun and which are used to refer to a single, discrete, first order (that is, spatial) entity. The immediate referent of an NP is not an entity in the real world, but rather a mental construct, whose properties need not coincide with the properties of its ontological correlate in the external world (if it exists). The various chapters touched on topics such as Seinsarten, nominal classification, qualifying modifiers, quantifying modifiers, localising modifiers, the underlying structure of noun phrases, and NP internal syntax.

This chapter examines how children acquire argument structures in K'iche', Mam, and Ch'ol. Mayan languages differ from pro-drop languages in that they use ergative markers to cross-reference the subject of transitive verbs and absolutive markers to cross-reference the subject of intransitive verbs. The contrast between ergative and absolutive agreement implies that subject drop in Mayan languages results from two distinct agreement mechanisms. Subject drop with transitive verbs is licensed by ergative agreement, whereas subject drop with intransitive verbs is licensed by absolutive agreement. The conditions for argument omission vary from one Mayan language to another. The chapter compares children's argument omission in K'iche', Mam, and Ch'ol and shows that they produce relational noun phrases at very different frequencies in the three languages.