Complement Structures: Outline Complement Structures and Non-Finite - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Complement Structures and Non-Finite Constructions in HPSG

Introduction to HPSG

• 19. Mai 2009

Kordula De Kuthy

1

Complement Structures: Outline

• Category selection
• Nonfinite constructions: Raising and control
• Passive construction

2

Category Selection

In GB, all of the following bracketed phrases are constituents: (1) a. Kim said [(that) Sandy left].

• b. Dana preferred [for Pat to get the job].
• c. Leslie wanted [Chris to go].
• d. Lee believed [Dominique to have made a mistake].
• e. Ren´

e tried [pro to win].

• f. Tracy proved [the theorem false].
• g. Bo considered [Lou a friend].
• h. Gerry expects [those children off the ship].

3

Problems for Small Clauses

This is the so-called small clause analysis. But there is a problem ... Verbs select for categories within those bracketings: (2) a. I consider [John a friend].

• b. *I consider [John off my ship].
• c. I expect [those children off the ship].
• d. *I expect [that man stupid].

But subcategorization is assumed to be local, i.e., you can’t subcategorize for something within the thing you’re subcategorizing for.

• So, either it’s not local or we shouldn’t use the small clause analysis

4

Questions for analyzing complements

• Is the selection simply semantic? ... Probably not:

(3) a. *I expect that island off the route.

• b. I expect that island to be off the route.
• Does the verb need access to the categorial properties of its complements?

... Most likely, yes (see above examples)

• Are all verbs the same? ... Definitely not:

(4) a. I consider/expect that island to be off the route.

• b. I consider/*expect that island off the route.
• c. I consider/expect that island to be a good vacation spot.
• d. I consider/*expect that island a good vacation spot.

5

Some generalizations

• expect and consider allow ap, pp, and infinitival complements
• With ap and pp, expect and consider can often have complements which

are semantically difficult to interpret (e.g., (3a))

• consider, but not expect, allows np complements

6

Verbs of becoming

In fact, lots of verbs seem to behave pretty differently w.r.t. their acceptable complements, as in all these verbs of becoming: (5) a. Kim became/grew/got/turned

• ut/ended

up/waxed political (AP).

• b. Kim became/*grew/*got/turned out/ended up/*waxed a success

(NP).

• c. Kim *became/*grew/got/*turned out/*ended up/*waxed sent

more and more leaflets (VP-en).

• d. Kim *became/*grew/*got/*turned out/ended up/*waxed doing

all the work (VP-ing).

• e. Kim *became/grew/got/turned out/*ended up/*waxed to like

anchovies (VP-inf). Despite similar meanings, none of these verbs have the same paradigm

7

Lexicalization and Localization

• Complement selection must be highly lexicalized

– Is not reducible to the semantics of a word

• Generally held belief that subcategorization is local → thus, these verbs

need their complements to be sisters – Verbs of considering show further evidence for sisterhood of comple- ments

8

Verbs of considering

(6) a. We rate/consider/*regard/*count Kim to be an acceptable can- didate (VP-inf).

• b. We rate/consider/*regard/*count Kim an acceptable candidate

(NP).

• c. We rate/consider/*regard/*count Kim quite acceptable (AP).
• d. We rate/consider/*regard/count Kim among the most accepta-

ble candidates (PP).

• e. We rate/*consider/regard/count Kim as an acceptable candidate

(PP-as). ⇒ consider and similar verbs need access to the phrase following Kim Thus, Kim an acceptable candidate doesn’t work as a small clause

9

Explaining the facts

These facts can best be explained if consider takes 2 arguments: the following NP and an XP after that. (7) consider V Kim NP (*as) an acceptable candidate XP VP With such a structure, consider can locally constrain the XP

• But how is the subject of (to be) an acceptable candidate equated with

the object of consider?

10

Counter-arguments?

One counter-argument against such structures would be if we had constitu- ency tests showing that the small clause analysis was best (8) They consider [Kim quite acceptable], and we consider ?that/?it, too. (9) *It was [Kim quite acceptable] that we considered. In lieu of compelling arguments from constituency tests, either we look at theory-internal arguments or take these local subcategorization facts seriously.

11

Review: ID Schemata (for English):

»phrase dtrs headed-struc –

→

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 synsem|loc|cat 2 6 4head »verb inv − – ∨ ¬ verb ! subcat 3 7 5 dtrs 2 6 4 head-comps-struc head-dtr phrase comp-dtrs ˙ sign ¸ 3 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 (Head-Subject)

∨

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 synsem|loc|cat 2 6 4head »verb inv − – ∨ ¬ verb ! subcat ˙ synsem¸ 3 7 5 dtrs »head-comps-struc head-dtr word – 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 (Head-Complement)

∨

2 6 6 6 6 6 4 synsem|loc|cat 2 6 4head »verb inv + – subcat 3 7 5 dtrs »head-comps-struc head-dtr word – 3 7 7 7 7 7 5 (Head-Subject-Complement)

12

Towards an analysis: Unsaturated Complements

Where does it say in these ID schemata that every subcategorized item must be realized?

• In English, many verbs and adjectives subcategorize for an unsaturated

complement.

• In other words, a complement can be specified as
• subcat
• NP
• , rather

than

• subcat
• – The Head-Subject Schema allows for this.

– And this will give consider access to the lower subject, as well as its

• wn subject.

13

The empirical challenge of non-finite constructions

In non-finite constructions, the subject of the embedded verb is not expressed as a locally realized dependent. Problem 1: What is interpreted to be the subject of the non-finite verb? (10) a. John tried to dance. (subject) b. John promised Peter to dance. (subject) c. John persuaded Peter to dance. (object)

14

Problem 2: Why do verbs selecting non-finite complements differ w.r.t. what kind of controllers can occur? (11) a. John tried to dance. (subject) b. John appeared to dance. (subject) (12) a. John persuaded Peter to dance. (object) b. John expects Peter to dance. (object) (13) a. * It tried to rain. (subject) b. It appeared to rain. (subject) (14) a. * John persuaded it to rain. (object) b. John expects it to rain. (object)

15

Classifying non-finite complements

Verbs selecting non-finite complements can be classified according to

• their orientation (subject, direct or indirect object):

– What is interpreted to be the subject of the non-finite complement?

• the nature of the relationship of the embedding verb to the

controller: – Is the controller an argument of the embedding verb?

16

Empirical basis of classification

• I. Orientation: Determined by interpretation of embedded infinitive.
• II. Relationship: embedding verb ↔ controller

Raising verbs only mediate the requirement of the complement:

• 1. If the embedded verb requires a non-referential

(= dummy) subject, so does the raising verb: (15) a. It rains.

• b. * God rains.

(16) a. It seems to rain.

• b. * God seems to rain.

(17) a. * It wants to rain.

• b. * God wants to rain.

17

The same holds when a dummy subject is permitted: (18) a. There is a dragon in the wood. b. Hobbs is a dragon in the wood. (19) a. There seems to be a dragon in the wood. b. Hobbs seems to be a dragon in the wood. (20) a. * There wants to be a dragon in the wood. b. Hobbs wants to be a dragon in the wood.

18

• 2. If the embedded verb permits a clausal subject, so does the raising

verb: (21) a. That Sarah dances fascinates John. b. Sarah fascinates John. (22) a. That Sarah dances seems to fascinate John. b. Sarah seems to fascinate John. (23) a. * That Sarah dances wants to fascinate John. b. Sarah wants to fascinate John.

• 3. If the embedded verb has a subject with an idiomatic interpretation,

so does it when selected by a raising verb: (24) The cat is out of the bag. (25) The cat seems to be out of the bag. (26) % The cat wants to be out of the bag.

19

• 4. In languages where subjectless constructions exist, raising verbs can

embed such subjectless complements: (27) a. Dort there scheint seems getanzt danced zu to werden. be

‘People seem to dance over there.’

b. Ihn him scheint seems zu to frieren. freeze

‘He seems to freeze.’

(28) a. * Dort there versucht tries getanzt danced zu to werden. be

• b. * Ihn

him versucht tries zu to frieren. freeze

20

• 5. passivization of the non-finite complement results

in a paraphrase (29) a. John seems to read a book. b. The book seems to be read by John. (30) a. John wants to read a book.

• b. % The book wants to be read by John.

21

Subject oriented raising verbs

                    word phon

<seem>

synsem                synsem local              local cat       cat head verb vform bse

• subcat
• 1, VP
• inf, subcat
• 1
• :2
• 

     cont seem soa-arg 2

• 

                                              

22

Subject oriented equi verbs

                       word phon

<try>

synsem                   synsem local                 local cat       cat head verb vform bse

• subcat
• NP1, VP
• inf, subcat

NP1

• :2
• 

     cont    try tryer

1ref

soa-arg 2                                                            

23

Object oriented raising verbs

                       word phon

<believe>

synsem                   synsem local                 local cat       cat head verb vform bse

• subcat
• NP1, 2, VP
• inf, subcat
• 2
• :3
• 

     cont    believe believer 1ref soa-arg

3

                                                           

24

Object oriented equi verbs

                         word phon

<persuade>

synsem                     synsem local                   local cat       cat head verb vform bse

• subcat
• NP1, NP2, VP
• inf, subcat

NP2

• :3
• 

     cont      persuade persuader 1ref persuadee 2ref soa-arg

3

                                                                   

25

Raising vs. Equi verbs

• Equi (control) verbs assign a semantic role to all arguments; raising verbs

do not

• Equi verbs co-index their subject (object) with an argument’s unexpressed

subject; raising verbs completely structure-share these elements

• Equi verbs require a referential subject (object), while raising verbs do

not

26

Capturing the generalization behind raising

Raising Principle (Pollard and Sag 1994, p. 140) Let E be a lexical entry whose subcat list L contains an element X not specified as expletive. Then X is lexically assigned no semantic role in the content of E if and only if L also contains a (nonsubject) Y [subcat < X >].

27

Raising as a widespread phenomenon

Complements of other categories Not only VP but also AP complements are possible complements of raising verbs like seem or appears: (31) John seems/appears intelligent. (32) John seems/appears to be intelligent.

28

Raising as a widespread phenomenon

More on AP complements Such AP complements behave parallel to the VP complements of raising verbs, e.g., with respect to clausal subjects: (33) a. That he came to her wedding is tasteless. b. John is tasteless. (34) a. That he came to her wedding seems to be tasteless. b. John seems to be tasteless. (35) a. That he came to her wedding seems tasteless. b. John seems tasteless. (36) a. * That he came to her wedding wants to be tasteless. b. John wants to be tasteless.

29

Interesting classes of raising verbs I

Copula be + predicative XP: (37) John is ugly. (AP complement) e.g., non-referential subjects of AP complements are possible: (38) It is likely that John sings tonight. Certain modal verbs + VP[bse]: (39) John may/must/shall run. (40) It may/must/shall rain.

30

Interesting classes of raising verbs II

Tense auxiliaries: (41) is + gerund

• a. John is running home.
• b. It is raining.

(42) will + base form:

• a. John will run home.
• b. It will rain.

(43) have + past-participle:

• a. John has run home.
• b. It has rained.

31

The infinitival marker to

(44) a. John will laugh / *to laugh / *laughed / *laughing. b. John has *laugh / *to laugh / laughed / *laughing. c. John is *laugh / *to laugh / *laughed / laughing. d. John seems *laugh / to laugh / *laughed / *laughing. What is the status of the infinitival marker to? Is it – part of the morphology of the infinitive, or – a separate syntactic element?

32

Arguing for status of to as separate syntactic element

In coordination contexts to can select a phrase: (45) John seems [to [come and go]] as he pleases. The alternative analysis (46) John seems [[to come] and [go]] as he pleases. is implausible since the verb form of the coordination is neither only determined by the first conjunct nor always to-infinitive if one is present: (47) * John seems [[go] and [to come]]

33

What kind of an element is to? A raising verb!

(48) John seems to run. (49) It seems to rain. A sample raising analysis: it seems to rain h c to rain h c seems to rain c h It seems to rain

34

The subtree to rain

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word p <to> s 2 6 6 6 6 6 4 l 2 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 4 head 6 " verb vform inf # subc D

5, 1VP

h bse, subc ˙

5

¸ i :7 E 3 7 7 5 cont 7 3 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word p <rain> s

1

2 6 6 6 6 4 l 2 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 4 head " verb vform bse # subc ˙

5NPit

¸ 3 7 5 cont 7rain 3 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

h c

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 phrase p <to rain> s

8

2 6 4l 2 6 4cat " head 6 subc ˙

5

¸ # cont 7 3 7 5 3 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

35

Analysis of: It seems to rain

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word p <it> s

5

2 6 6 4l 2 6 4 cat " head noun subc # cont ˆ index it ˜ 3 7 5 3 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word p <seems> s|l 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 4 head 9 " verb vform fin # subc D

5, 8VP

h inf, subc ˙

5

¸ i :7 E 3 7 7 5 cont 10 " seem soa-arg 7 # 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 phrase p <to rain> s

8

2 6 6 6 6 4 l 2 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 4 head 6 " verb vform inf # subc ˙

5NPit

¸ 3 7 5 cont 7rain 3 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

h c

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 phrase p <seems to rain> s|l 2 6 4cat " head 9 subc ˙

5

¸ # cont 10 3 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

c h

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 phrase p <It seems to rain> s|l 2 6 4cat " head 9 subc # cont 10 3 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

36

Analysis of: *It wants to rain

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word p <wants> s|l 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 6 4 head 9 " verb vform fin # subc D

3NP11, 8VP

h inf, subc D

5NP11

E i :7 E 3 7 7 7 5 con 10 2 6 4 want wanter

11ref

soa-arg 7 3 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 phrase p <to rain> s

8

2 6 6 6 6 6 4 l 2 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 4 head 6 " verb vform inf # subc D

5NPit

E 3 7 7 5 con 7rain 3 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

h c

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 phrase p <wants to rain> s |l 2 6 4cat " head 9 subc ˙

3

¸ # con 10 3 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

37

The Passive: subject-to-subject raising

(50) a. John has stolen the ring.

• b. The ring was stolen.

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word phon <has> synsem 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 local 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 4 head »verb vform fin – subcat D

1, VP

h past-participle, subcat ˙

1

¸ i :2 E 3 7 7 5 cont »perfective soa-arg 2 – 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word phon <was> synsem 2 6 6 6 6 4 local 2 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 4 head »verb vform fin – subcat D

1, VP

h passive-participle, subcat ˙

1

¸ i :2 E 3 7 7 5 cont 2 3 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

38

Past and Passive Participles

2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word phon <stolen> synsem 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 local 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 4 head »verb vform past-participle – subcat D NP1, NP2 E 3 7 5 cont 2 4 steal stealer 1ref stolen

2ref

3 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 word phon <stolen> synsem 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 local 2 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 cat 2 6 6 4 head »verb vform passive-participle – subcat D NP2 E ⊕ D “ PP[by]1 ” E 3 7 7 5 cont 2 4 steal stealer 1ref stolen

2ref

3 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5

39

Past and Passive Participles

A lexical rule to express the generalization

2 6 6 6 6 6 4 word synsem|loc|cat 2 6 6 4 head " verb vform past-participle # subcat D NP1, NP2 | 3 E 3 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 7 7 5

→

2 6 6 6 4synsem|loc|cat 2 6 6 4 head " verb vform passive-participle # subcat D NP2 E ⊕ 3 ⊕ D “ PP[by]1 ” E 3 7 7 5 3 7 7 7 5

40