syntax
• The part of grammar that represents a speaker’s knowledge of
sentences and their structures is called syntax.
• The aim of this chapter is to show what syntactic structures
look like and to familiarize you with some of the rules that
determine them.
What the syntax rules do
• The rules of syntax combine words into phrases and
phrases into sentences.
a) the rules specify the correct word order for a
language.
1. The President nominated a new Supreme Court justice.
2. *President the new Supreme justice Court a nominated.
What the syntax rules do
• b) describe the relationship between the
meaning of a particular group of words and
the arrangement of those words.
3. I mean what I say.
4. I say what I mean.
What the syntax rules do
• The rules of the syntax also specify the grammatical
relations of a sentence, such as subject and direct
object.
5. Your dog chased my cat.
6. My cat chased your dog.
What the syntax rules do
• specify the constraints that sentences must adhere
to.
7. (a) The boy found.
(b) The boy found quickly.
(c) The boy found in the house.
(d) The boy found the ball.
8. (a) Disa slept the baby.
• (b) Disa slept soundly.
What the syntax rules do
• specify the constraints that sentences must adhere
to.
•
•
•
•
•
•
9. (a) Zack believes Robert to be a gentleman.
(b) Zack believes to be a gentleman.
(c) Zack tries Robert to be a gentleman.
(d) Zack tries to be a gentleman.
(e) Zack wants to be a gentleman.
(f) Zack wants Robert to be a gentleman.
What the syntax rules do
• Our syntactic knowledge crucially includes rules that
tell us how words form groups in a sentence, or how
they are hierarchically arranged with respect to one
another.
• The captain ordered all old men and women off the sinking
ship.
• [old men] and [women]
• [old [men and women]]
What the syntax rules do
Sentence Structure
Constituency and Constituency tests
Syntactic Categories
• A family of expressions that can substitute for one another
without loss of grammaticality is called a syntactic category.
• The child, a police officer, John, and so on belong to the
syntactic category noun phrase (NP), one of several syntactic
categories in English and every other language in the world.
•
•
•
•
•
John found the puppy.
He found the puppy.
Boys love puppies.
The puppy loved him.
The puppy loved John.
Syntactic Categories
• Syntactic categories are part of a speaker’s knowledge of syntax. That is,
speakers of English know that only items (a), (b), (e), (f), and (g) in the
following list are NPs even if they have never heard the term noun phrase
before.
1.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
(a) a bird
(b) the red banjo
(c) have a nice day
(d) with a balloon
(e) the woman who was laughing
(f) it
(g) John
(h) went
You can test this claim by inserting each
expression into three contexts:
Who found _________,
_________ was seen by everyone,
What/who I heard was _________.
Syntactic Categories
•
There are other syntactic categories. The expression found a puppy is a verb
phrase (VP). A verb phrase always contains a verb (V), and it may contain other
categories, such as a noun phrase or prepositional phrase (PP), which is a
preposition followed by an NP, such as in the park, on the roof, with a balloon. In
(2) the VPs are those phrases that can complete the sentence “The child
__________ .”
2.
(a) saw a clown
(b) a bird
(c) slept
(d) smart
(e) ate the cake
(f) found the cake in the cupboard
(g) realized that the earth was round
Phrase Structure Trees and Rules
The Infinity of Language
•
The number of sentences in any language is, as we have said before, infinite.
•
This is because you can always make any sentence longer and longer by adding extra
CPs, VPs, APs, NPs etc.
•
Once we acknowledge the unboundedness of sentences, we need a formal device to
capture that crucial aspect of speakers’ syntactic knowledge.
•
To see how this works, let us first look at the case of multiple
prepositional phrases such as [The girl walked [down the street]
[over the hill] [through the woods] ..].
•
According to our PS-rules we have devised so far, VP substructures
currently allow only one PP per sentence (VP →V PP—rule 5).
We can rectify this problem by revising rule 5:
The Infinity of Language
•
The number of sentences in any language is, as we have said before, infinite.
•
This is because you can always make any sentence longer and longer by adding extra
CPs, VPs, APs, NPs etc.
•
Once we acknowledge the unboundedness of sentences, we need a formal device to
capture that crucial aspect of speakers’ syntactic knowledge.
•
To see how this works, let us first look at the case of multiple
prepositional phrases such as [The girl walked [down the street]
[over the hill] [through the woods] . . .].
•
According to our PS-rules we have devised so far, VP substructures
currently allow only one PP per sentence (VP →V PP—rule 5).
We can rectify this problem by revising rule 5:
The Infinity of Language
•
The number of sentences in any language is, as we have said before, infinite.
•
This is because you can always make any sentence longer and longer by adding extra
CPs, VPs, APs, NPs etc.
•
Once we acknowledge the unboundedness of sentences, we need a formal device to
capture that crucial aspect of speakers’ syntactic knowledge.
•
To see how this works, let us first look at the case of multiple
prepositional phrases such as [The girl walked [down the street]
[over the hill] [through the woods] . . .].
•
According to our PS-rules we have devised so far, VP substructures
currently allow only one PP per sentence (VP →V PP—rule 5).
We can rectify this problem by revising rule 5:
5. VP → VP PP
The Infinity of Language
•
Rule 5 is different from the previous rules because it repeats its own category (VP) inside
itself. This is an instance of a recursive rule. Recursive rules are of critical importance because
they allow the grammar to generate an infinite set of sentences.
The Infinity of Language
•
Rule 5 is different from the previous rules because it repeats its own category (VP) inside
itself. This is an instance of a recursive rule. Recursive rules are of critical importance because
they allow the grammar to generate an infinite set of sentences.
The Infinity of Language
•
NPs can also contain PPs recursively. An example of this is shown by the phrase the man with
the telescope in a box.
The Infinity of Language
•
NPs can also contain PPs recursively. An example of this is shown by the phrase the man with
the telescope in a box.
The Infinity of Language
•
NPs can also contain PPs recursively. An example of this is shown by the phrase the man with
the telescope in a box.
To show that speakers permit recursive NP structures
of this sort, we need to include the following PS rule,
which is like the recursive VP rule 5.
9. NP → NP PP
The Infinity of Language
•
•
•
The defined PS rules handle the recursive nature of the language.
For example, rule 7 (VP → V CP) in combination with rules 8 (CP → C S) and 1 (S → NP VP)
form a recursive set.
These rules, formulated for different purposes, correctly predict the limitlessness of
language in which sentences are embedded inside larger sentences, such as The children
hope that the teacher knows that the principal said that the school closes for the day as
illustrated on the following page.
The Infinity of Language
•
The children hope that the teacher knows that
the principal said that the school closes for
the day.
The Infinity of Language
The Infinity of Language
•
•
•
•
The problem is that although determiners and adjectives are both modifiersof the noun,
they have a different status.
First, an NP will never have more than one determiner in it, while it may contain many
adjectives.
Second, an adjective directly modifies the noun, while a determiner modifies the whole
adjective(s) + noun complex.
In general, modification occurs between sisters. If the adjective modifies the noun, then it
is sister to the noun. If the determiner modifies the adjective + noun complex, then the
determiner is sister to this complex.
The Infinity of Language
•
•
•
•
The problem is that although determiners and adjectives are both modifiersof the noun,
they have a different status.
First, an NP will never have more than one determiner in it, while it may contain many
adjectives.
Second, an adjective directly modifies the noun, while a determiner modifies the whole
adjective(s) + noun complex.
In general, modification occurs between sisters. If the adjective modifies the noun, then it
is sister to the noun. If the determiner modifies the adjective + noun complex, then the
determiner is sister to this complex.
We can represent these two sisterhood relations by
İntroducing an additional level of structure between NP and
N. We refer to this level as N-bar (written as N').
This structure provides the desired sisterhood
relations
The Infinity of Language
•
We must revise our NP rules to reflect this new structure, and add two rules for N'. Not
all NPs have adjectives, of course. This is reflected in the second N' rule in which N'
dominates only N.
Let us now see how these revised rules generate NPs with multiple (potentially infinitely
many) adjectives.
Thus far all the NPs we have looked at are common nouns with a simple definite or
indefinite determiner (e.g., the cat, a boy), but NPs can consist of a simple pronoun
(e.g., he, she, we, they) or a proper name (e.g., Robert, California, Prozac). To reflect
determiner-less NP structures, we will need the rule
NP → N'
The Infinity of Language
•
But that’s not all, what about the possesive NPs like John’s cat, the girl’s book etc.
In these structures the possessor NP (e.g., John’s, the girl’s, etc.) functions as a
determiner in that it further specifies its sister noun.
The ’s is the abstract element poss.
To accommodate the possessive structure we
need an additional rule:
Det → NP poss
The Infinity of Language
•
But that’s not all, what about the possesive NPs like John’s cat, the girl’s book etc.
In these structures the possessor NP (e.g., John’s, the girl’s, etc.) functions as a
determiner in that it further specifies its sister noun.
The ’s is the abstract element poss.
To accommodate the possessive structure we
need an additional rule:
Det → NP poss
The rules so far
S
VP
VP
VP
VP
NP
N’
N’
PP
Adjp
AdvP
CP
Det
= NP VP
= V NP
=V
= VP PP
= VP AdvP
= (D) N’
= (AdjP) N’ or N’ (PP)
= N (PP)
= P NP
= (AdvP) Adj
= (AdvP) Adv
=CS
= NP poss
Heads and Complements
Phrase structure trees also show relationships among elements in a sentence.
Grammatical relations, i.e. subject and direct object of the sentence is
structurally defined.
Another kind of relationship is that between the head of a phrase and its
sisters. The head of a phrase is the word whose lexical category defines the
type of phrase
Sister categories are complements; they complete the meaning of the
phrase. E.g. find a puppy; I thought that the child found a puppy.
Selection
• Subcategorization (C-selection)
Whether a verb takes a complement or not, or the number of
complements that it should take is determined by the
particular properties of the verb.
(1)
The philosopher loves caramel apples
The philosopher smiled
(2)
*The philosopher loves
*The philosopher smiled the breadbox.
Selection
• Subcategorization
(3) Traci gave the whale the jawbreaker.
*Traci gave the whale.
*Traci gave the jawbreaker.
(4) I think that Sam won the race.
(5) I told Sam that Michael was on his bicycle.
(6) Paul felt strong as an ox.
He feels that he can win.
Selection
• Subcategorization
The information about the complement types selected by
particular verbs and other lexical items is called C-selection or
subcategorization.
Selection
• Subcategorization
Verbs are not the only categories that can select
complements.
Some adjectives such as “tired” and “proud” select a PP
complement:
tired of eating sandwiches
proud of her children
Selection
• Subcategorization
Nouns can also selects complements. For example, the noun
“belief” selectes a PP or a CP complement while the noun
“symphaty” selects a PP complement:
the belief in freedom of speech
the belief that freedom of speech is a basic right
their sympathy for the victims
*their sympathy that the victims are so poor
Selection
• S-selection
S-selection limit the semantic properties of the complements.
#My toothbrush loves me.
#The bolt of lightening killed the rock.
#The rock murdered the man.
#The tree liked the boy.
Verbs include in their lexical entry a specification of intrinsic
semantic properties of their subjects and complements, just as they select
for syntactic categories.
What heads the sentence?
The category T is a natural category to head S. Just as the VP is about the
situation described by the verb—eat ice cream is about “eating”—so a
sentence is about a situation or state of affairs that occurs at some point in
time.
What heads the sentence?
VP here is the complement to T. Therefore,
there is a selectional relationship between
T and VP.
Particular Ts go with particular kinds of
VPs. For example, the auxiliary be takes a
progressive (-ing) form of the verb:
The boy is dancing.
The auxiliary have selects a past participle (-en) form of the verb:
The girl has eaten.
Modals select the infinitival form of the verb (no affixes):
The child must sleep
The boy may eat.
What heads the sentence?
To have a uniform notation, we use the symbols T (= tense) and TP (=
tense phrase) instead of Aux and S.
Furthermore, just as the NP required the intermediate N-bar (N')
category, the TP also has the intermediate T-bar (T') category.
We need to include other rules into our system:
TP = NP T’
T’ = T VP
What heads the sentence?
Your book does not use the TP and T’ categories, therefore they use a different
rule instead of what we have:
What heads the sentence?
They do it because English allows sentences with multiple auxiliaries such
as:
The child may be sleeping. (modal, be)
The dog has been barking all night. (have, be)
The bird must have been flying home. (modal, have, be)
What heads the sentence?
Instead of this, I want you use the TP rule, but take all the auxiliaries
under the same T when there are more than one auxiliary
TP
T’
NP
D
the
N’
T
VP
N
child
may be
V
sleeping
Structural Ambiguities
• The boy saw the man with the telescope.
Structural Ambiguities
• The boy saw the man with the telescope.
Structural Ambiguities
• The boy saw the man with the telescope.
Structural Ambiguities
• The boy saw the man with the telescope.
The rules so far (updated1)
TP
T’
VP
VP
VP
VP
NP
N’
N’
PP
Adjp
AdvP
CP
Det
= NP T’
= T VP
= V NP
=V
= VP PP
= VP AdvP
= (D) N’
= (AdjP) N’ or N’ (PP)
= N (PP)
= P NP
= (AdvP) Adj
= (AdvP) Adv
= C TP
= NP poss
More structures
More structures
Adverbial phrases are sisters to phrasal
categories.
Thus,
they can also be sisters to TP.
“Probably the dog has fleas”
More structures
Adverbial phrases are sisters to phrasa categories.
The dog completely destroyed the house.
Thus, they can also be sisters to TP.
“Probably the dog has fleas”
TP = AdvP TP
More structures
Coordinate structures:
The cat and the dog were friends.
More structures
Does Coord+NP2 really form a constituent. Let’s try some
constituency tests.
Casey bought a book and a CD yesterday
Casey bought a book yesterday and a CD.
*Casey bought a book and yesterday a CD.
More structures
Does Coord+NP2 really form a constituent. Let’s try some
constituency tests.
Casey bought a book and a CD yesterday
Casey bought a book yesterday and a CD.
*Casey bought a book and yesterday a CD.
More structures
Does Coord+NP2 really form a constituent. Let’s try some
constituency tests.
Casey bought a book and a CD yesterday
Casey bought a book yesterday and a CD.
*Casey bought a book and yesterday a CD.
Other coordinations are also possible:
Micheal writes poetry and surfs.
Sam drove to the school and to the pool.
What is the coordination rule?
More structures
The cat is coy.
The cat is in the tree.
The cat is a feline.
TP
T’
NP
T
VP
More structures
The cat is coy.
The cat is in the tree.
The cat is a feline.
TP
T’
NP
T
XP
(can be any phrase)
The rules so far (updated2)
TP
TP
T’
VP
VP
VP
VP
NP
N’
N’
PP
Adjp
AdvP
CP
Det
NP
coordP
= AdvP TP
= NP T’
= T XP (where XP can be PP, AdjP, VP, NP)
= V NP
=V
= VP PP
= VP AdvP
= (D) N’
= (AdjP) N’ or N’ (PP)
= N (PP)
= P NP
= (AdvP) Adj
= (AdvP) Adv
= C TP
= NP poss
= NP coordP
= coord NP
Sentence Relatedness
• Transformational rules and movement
The boy is sleeping.
The boy has slept.
The boy can sleep.
The boy will sleep.
Is the boy sleeping.
Has the boy slept?
Can the boy sleep?
Will the boy sleep?
Apperantly, the T head is moved here, but where does it go?
Transformational rules and
movement
TP
T’
NP
T
VP
V
NP
Transformational rules and
movement
CP
c
TP
T’
NP
T
VP
V
NP
One possibility is that they move to C, but what kind of evidence we have for this
claim? Let’s think about C’s…
Transformational rules and
movement
In embedded clauses, the function of the C is to determine whether the clause
is a question or a declarative clause:
I didn’t know that Mary was a student of linguistics.
Ǿ
John asked whether Mary was a student of linguistics.
if
That and Ǿ indicate that the clause has a declarative form, whether and if
indicate that it has a question form.
Transformational rules and movement
We know that all sentences are actually CPs, so what indicates whether they
have a question or declarative form?
If the C-head is null morpheme Ǿ, the sentence has declarative form.
If it has a question form, T moves to C to indicate that the sentence is a question.
Further evidence for T-to-C movement: Complementary distribution
T’s and C’s are in complementary distribution in embedded clauses.
I asked “has he found his wallet”.
I asked whether he has found his wallet.
*I asked whether has he found his wallet
Structure Dependant Rules
• Transformations act on structures without regard to te particular words
that they contain; they are structure dependant.
• The transformational rule of PP preposing moves PPs only if they are
immediately dominated by VPs.
• Brutus stabbed Ceasar with a knife.
• With a knife, Brutus stabbed Ceasar.
• Now consider:
John saw the boy with the telescope.
(ambigious, PP can be dominated
by VP or NP)
With the telescope, John saw the boy. (Not ambigious, corresponds to
the meaning where PP is
dominated by VP)
Structure Dependant Rules
• Further evidence for structure dependancy of transformations
• The boy who is sleeping was dreaming.
• Was the boy who is sleeping dreaming?
• *Is the boy who sleeping was dreaming?
You cannot move any T in T-to-C movement.
Further Syntactic Dependancies
Further Syntactic Dependancies
Further Syntactic Dependancies
The grammaticality of a sentence with a gap depends on there being a wh
phrase at the beginning of the sentence. The sentences in (1) are grammatical
because the wh phrase is acting like the object in (a), the prepositional phrase
object in (b), and the embedded subject in (c).
Further syntactic dependancies
Further syntactic dependancies
Further syntactic dependancies
Do-support
Which dog doesMicheal feed?
CP
Spec
C
C’
TP
T’
NP
Micheal
T
-s
VP
V
feed
NP
which dog
Further syntactic dependancies
Do-support
Which dog does she think love balls?
CP
C’
C
C
TP
T’
NP
Micheal
T
do + s
VP
V
feed
NP
which dog
Further syntactic dependancies
Do-support
Which dog does she think love balls?
CP
Spec
C
does
C’
TP
T’
NP
Micheal
T
t
VP
V
feed
NP
which dog
Further syntactic dependancies
Do-support
Which dog does she think love balls?
CP
Spec
C
does
C’
TP
T’
NP
Micheal
T
t
VP
V
feed
NP
which dog
Further syntactic dependancies
Do-support
Which dog does she think love balls?
CP
Spec
C’
Which dog
C
does
TP
T’
NP
Micheal
T
t
VP
V
t
NP
which dog
The rules so far (updated3)
TP
TP
T’
VP
VP
VP
VP
VP
NP
N’
N’
PP
Adjp
AdvP
CP
C’
Det
NP
coordP
= AdvP TP
= NP T’
= T XP (where XP can be PP, AdjP, VP, NP)
= V NP
=V
= VP PP
= VP AdvP
=V CP
= (D) N’
= (AdjP) N’ or N’ (PP)
= N (PP)
= P NP
= (AdvP) Adj
= (AdvP) Adv
= (Spec) C’
= C TP
= NP poss
= NP coordP
= coord NP