Download Arguments as relations / by John Bowers PDF
By John Bowers
Sequence ahead -- Preface -- 1. creation and assessment -- 2. Passive -- three. Affectee arguments -- four. Grammatical functionality altering morphology -- five. Derived nominals -- 6. end -- Appendix A. A compositional semantics for argument heads -- Appendix B. First program of merge -- Notes -- References -- Index.
Read or Download Arguments as relations / PDF
Similar language & grammar books
A standard framework less than which a few of the reviews on terminology processing may be considered is to contemplate not just the texts from which the terminological assets are outfitted yet really the functions special. the present publication, first released as a unique factor of Terminology 11:1 (2005), analyses the impression of purposes on time period definition and processing.
Arabic-English-Arabic felony Translation offers a groundbreaking research of the problems present in felony translation among Arabic and English. Drawing on a contrastive-comparative procedure, it analyses parallel actual criminal files in either Arabic and English to envision the good points of criminal discourse in either languages and discover different translation thoughts used.
Whereas the literature on both contrastive linguistics or discourse research has grown immensely within the final 20 years, little or no of it has ventured into fusing the 2 views. taking into account that doing discourse research with no contrastive base is as incomplete as doing contrastive research and not using a discourse base, the categorical objective of this ebook is to argue that translation can upload intensity and breadth to either contrastive linguistics in addition to to discourse research.
This publication provides new facts and extra questions in regards to the linguistic cycle. the subjects mentioned are the pronoun, adverse, damaging existential, analytic-synthetic, distributive, determiner, measure, and future/modal cycles. The papers bring up questions about the size of time that cycles take, the interactions among diverse cycles, the common levels and their balance, and the areal elements influencing cycles.
- How Texts Work (Routledge a Level English Guides)
- How to understand language : a philosophical inquiry
- Common Core Skills & Strategies for Reading, Level 5
- Explorations in Pragmatics: Linguistic, Cognitive and Intercultural Aspects
- The Origins of the Slavs: A Linguist's View
Extra info for Arguments as relations /
Consider, for example, the following dialogues: (11) a. A: B: b. A: B: Who were the books given to John by? They were given to John by HIMSELF. Who was Mary shown John by? Mary was shown John by HIMSELF. 36 (12) a. A: B: b. A: B: Chapter 2 Were the books given to John by MARY? No, they were given to John by HIMSELF. Was Mary shown John by BILL? No, she was show John by HIMSELF. It might be objected that the reﬂexives in the by-phrase in these examples must have focus stress, raising the possibility that they are not true anaphors subject to Condition A.
A: B: b. A: B: Chapter 2 Were the books given to John by MARY? No, they were given to John by HIMSELF. Was Mary shown John by BILL? No, she was show John by HIMSELF. It might be objected that the reﬂexives in the by-phrase in these examples must have focus stress, raising the possibility that they are not true anaphors subject to Condition A. However, we can easily set up the context so that they are not focused and hence not stressed: (13) a. A: B: b. A: B: Were THE RECORDS given to John by himself ?
Moreover, the empirical evidence strongly supports my claim that Ag is merged early in the derivation before any other arguments or quasi-arguments. 2 Collins’s (2005) Smuggling Analysis of Passive Before continuing, I discuss an interesting attempt by Collins (2005) to derive the by-phrase of passives from the same underlying syntactic position as the subject of actives. The only way this goal can be accomplished within the standard theory of argument structure is to assume that the byphrase of the passive originates in Spec,v: (44) 48 Chapter 2 As Collins observes, however, there are at least two obvious problems with this approach in its simplest form: (i) it produces a highly marked word order: *the book was by John written; (ii) the movement of the object the book to [Spec, I] violates Relativized Minimality.