| { |
| "paper_id": "Y13-1003", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T13:32:22.646633Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "Head-internal Relatives in Japanese as Rich Context-Setters", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Tohru", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Seraku", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": { |
| "laboratory": "", |
| "institution": "St. Catherine's College Manor Road", |
| "location": { |
| "postCode": "OX1 3UJ", |
| "settlement": "Oxford", |
| "country": "UK" |
| } |
| }, |
| "email": "tohru.seraku@scatz.ox.ac.uk" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "Head-Internal Relatives (HIRs) in Japanese are regarded as rich context-setters within Dynamic Syntax (DS): the propositional tree of the HIR clause is mapped onto a 'partial' tree, which establishes a rich context for the embedding clause to be parsed. This partial tree contains a situation node decorated with the Relevancy restriction and a node for an internal head. This account handles some new data and makes a novel prediction. Further, it is shown that the past DS analysis of HIRs in fact models change relatives (but not HIRs).", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "Y13-1003", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "Head-Internal Relatives (HIRs) in Japanese are regarded as rich context-setters within Dynamic Syntax (DS): the propositional tree of the HIR clause is mapped onto a 'partial' tree, which establishes a rich context for the embedding clause to be parsed. This partial tree contains a situation node decorated with the Relevancy restriction and a node for an internal head. This account handles some new data and makes a novel prediction. Further, it is shown that the past DS analysis of HIRs in fact models change relatives (but not HIRs).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "Japanese displays so-called HIRs (Head-Internal Relatives), where the relative clause lacks a gap, the head is found inside the relative clause, and the relative clause ends with the particle no.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(1) [Ringo-ga tsukue-no-ue-ni [apple-NOM (DS; Cann et al., 2005; Kempson et al., 2001) . Sect. 2 surveys previous studies. Sect. 3 introduces DS. Sect. 4 argues that the past DS account of no (Cann et al., 2005) fails to capture the non-nominality of HIRs. Sect. 5 presents an alternative DS account. Sect. 6 argues that the past DS account of no models change relatives (but not HIRs). Sect. 7 concludes the paper.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 4, |
| "end": 40, |
| "text": "[Ringo-ga tsukue-no-ue-ni [apple-NOM", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 41, |
| "end": 45, |
| "text": "(DS;", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 46, |
| "end": 64, |
| "text": "Cann et al., 2005;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 65, |
| "end": 86, |
| "text": "Kempson et al., 2001)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 192, |
| "end": 211, |
| "text": "(Cann et al., 2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Several papers collected in Kuroda (1992) as a point of departure, the Japanese HIR has been extensively explored (Kitagawa, 2005; Kuroda, 2005 ; see references therein). Two approaches stand out. First, some scholars note parallelisms between HIRs and E-type anaphora and make use of the E-type mechanism for HIRs (Hoshi, 1995; Kim, 2007 Kim, , 2008a Kim, /b, 2009 Matsuda, 2002; Shimoyama, 1999 Shimoyama, , 2001 . The most advanced work in this camp is Kim's analysis. Second, others postulate the null functional head ChR (Choose Role) as a sister to VP, and assume that ChR picks out the internal head by choosing a salient thematic role in the eventuality denoted by VP (Grosu, 2010; Grosu & Landman, 2012 ).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 28, |
| "end": 41, |
| "text": "Kuroda (1992)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF15" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 114, |
| "end": 130, |
| "text": "(Kitagawa, 2005;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF13" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 131, |
| "end": 143, |
| "text": "Kuroda, 2005", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF16" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 315, |
| "end": 328, |
| "text": "(Hoshi, 1995;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 329, |
| "end": 338, |
| "text": "Kim, 2007", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 339, |
| "end": 351, |
| "text": "Kim, , 2008a", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF10" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 352, |
| "end": 365, |
| "text": "Kim, /b, 2009", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 366, |
| "end": 380, |
| "text": "Matsuda, 2002;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF18" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 381, |
| "end": 396, |
| "text": "Shimoyama, 1999", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF22" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 397, |
| "end": 414, |
| "text": "Shimoyama, , 2001", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF23" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 676, |
| "end": 689, |
| "text": "(Grosu, 2010;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 690, |
| "end": 711, |
| "text": "Grosu & Landman, 2012", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF5" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Kim's E-type analysis and the ChR analysis are the two most influential accounts of HIRs in the literature, but they seem need revisions. First, it is widely held that the head in the HIR denotes a maximal set of individuals that satisfy the HIR clause description (Hoshi, 1995) . For instance, for (1) to be felicitous, the situation must be the one where Kiki ate all of the apples on the table. But maximality effects are shown to be derived pragmatically. Thus, for (2) to be felicitous, a situation must be the one where each passenger puts no more than one ticket in the checker, even though he has multiple tickets, provided our world knowledge that the insertion of multiple tickles may cause malfunction of the checker (Kubota & Smith, 2007: 154) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 265, |
| "end": 278, |
| "text": "(Hoshi, 1995)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 728, |
| "end": 755, |
| "text": "(Kubota & Smith, 2007: 154)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2) Dono-zyookyaku i -mo [e i saifu-ni every-passenger-too [ wallet-in kaisuuken-ga haitteita no]-o coupon.ticket-NOM was.present NO]-ACC toridashite kaisatsu-ni ireta. pick.up ticket.checker-to put 'Every passenger picked up a coupon ticket that she/he had in (her/his) wallet and put it in the ticket checker.' In Kim's account, maximality effects obtain due to the feature [+definite] of the head D, and in the ChR account, they emerge due to the feature [MAX] of the head C. Thus, both accounts do not predict the context-dependency of maximality.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 458, |
| "end": 463, |
| "text": "[MAX]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Second, HIRs are not sensitive to islands. For instance, Mihara (1994: 239) shows that the HIR (3) is not sensitive to the complex NP island. 1 (3) [Taro-ga [Hanako-ga subarashii ronbun-o [T-NOM [H-NOM excellent paper-ACC kaita toiu uwasa]-o kiiteita wrote TOIU rumour]-ACC has.heard no]-ga tsuini syuppansareta. NO]-NOM finally was.published 'Taro has heard a rumour that Hanako wrote an excellent paper, and the paper was finally published.' Kim's account cannot model island-insensitivity of HIRs because it concerns only the eventuality denoted by the highest clause in the HIR clause (cf., Grosu (2010: 250) ). In the ChR account, a null operator at Spec, ChRP undergoes cyclic A'movement and this predicts island-sensitivity of HIRs. This prediction is said to be borne-out by considering data in Watanabe (2003) , but without taking into account the examples such as (3).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 57, |
| "end": 75, |
| "text": "Mihara (1994: 239)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 142, |
| "end": 143, |
| "text": "1", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 148, |
| "end": 187, |
| "text": "[Taro-ga [Hanako-ga subarashii ronbun-o", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 595, |
| "end": 612, |
| "text": "Grosu (2010: 250)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 803, |
| "end": 818, |
| "text": "Watanabe (2003)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF25" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Finally, it has been widely believed that the HIR clause cannot license negation (Hoshi, 1995; Grosu & Landman, 2012) . The present paper, however, observes that negation is licensed if the existence of the individual denoted by the head is inferable. For instance, negation is licensed in the HIR (4) because it is inferable that there was a wallet somewhere other than a safe.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 81, |
| "end": 94, |
| "text": "(Hoshi, 1995;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 95, |
| "end": 117, |
| "text": "Grosu & Landman, 2012)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF5" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4) Dorobo-wa [saifu-ga kinko-ni thief-TOP [wallet-NOM safe-at haittei-naka-tta no]-o put.inside-NEG-PAST NO]-ACC manmato nusumi-dashita. successfully steal-took.away 'A wallet was not inside a safe (but outside the safe), and a thief successfully stole it.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In the ChR account, they might argue that saifu moves over NegP at LF so that it out-scopes the negator. But this remedy is untenable since ChR cannot select NegP, anyway. This is because it is assumed that (i) VP denotes an open proposition with an event slot; (ii) ChR selects such an open proposition; but (iii) NegP closes the proposition over the event slot before it is selected by ChR (Grosu & Landman, 2012: 176 ). Kim's account, on the other hand, seems to correctly treat (4). In her analysis, the head denotes the maximal set of individuals that satisfy a salient property and a salient thematic role in the state denoted by the HIR clause. In (4), the property is identified with saifu' and the role is identified with Theme. So, the head saifu is correctly detected. As illustrated in (5), however, the negation data display longdistance dependency. Given that Kim's account concerns only the state denoted by the highest clause in the HIR (cf., discussion around (3)), it cannot detect the head hoseki in (5). These data undermine the recent works on the HIR. In this paper, I shall propose an alternative account within Dynamic Syntax.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 392, |
| "end": 419, |
| "text": "(Grosu & Landman, 2012: 176", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Previous Studies", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Dynamic Syntax (DS) is a formalism that models 'knowledge of language,' construed as a set of procedures to build up an interpretation on the basis of word-by-word parsing in real time (Cann et al., 2005; Kempson et al., 2001) . DS assumes semantic representation without a separate level of syntactic representation. So, a string is directly mapped onto a semantic structure as it is parsed left-to-right online.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 185, |
| "end": 204, |
| "text": "(Cann et al., 2005;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 205, |
| "end": 226, |
| "text": "Kempson et al., 2001)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Dynamic Syntax (DS)", |
| "sec_num": "3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "DS models gradual updates of an interpretation as progressive growth of a semantic tree. The initial state is specified by the Axiom:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(6) Axiom ?t, \u2662", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The Axiom sets out a node decorated with ?t, a requirement that this node will be of type-t. A pointer \u2662 indicates a node under development. A parser updates this initial tree state by executing general, lexical, and pragmatic actions. Every time a node is created, it comes with a set of requirements, and every tree update is driven by some form of requirements. A DS tree is said to be well-formed iff no outstanding requirements remain. A string is said to be grammatical iff there is a tree update that leads to a well-formed tree. For instance, if a parser processes 7, it gradually updates the initial state (6) by running general, lexical, or pragmatic actions until the well-formed tree (8) emerges, where there are no outstanding requirements. (Throughout this paper, tense is set aside; see Cann (2011) .)", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 802, |
| "end": 813, |
| "text": "Cann (2011)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF1" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(7) Kiki-ga hashi-tta. K-NOM run-PST 'Kiki ran.' (8) hashi'(Kiki')(SIT) : t, \u2662 SIT : e S hashi'(Kiki') : e S \u2192t", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Kiki' : e hashi' : e\u2192(e S \u2192t)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "DS trees are binary-branching, an argument being on the left and a functor on the right. Each node is decorated with a pair \u03b1 : \u03b2, where \u03b1 is a semantic content and \u03b2 is a set of labels that show various properties of the content such as logical type. In (8), hashi (= 'run') takes not only the subject term Kiki' but also the situation term SIT. DS assumes that all verbs select a situation term of type-e (cf., Davidson (1967) ). The type of situation term is notated as e S .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 413, |
| "end": 428, |
| "text": "Davidson (1967)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF3" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The backbone of DS trees is LOFT (Logic Of Finite Trees; Blackburn & Meyer-Viol (1994) ). LOFT is a language to talk about node relations. Two operators are of particular relevance to this paper. <\u2193 0 > refers to an argument daughter and <\u2193 1 > refers to a functor daughter, together with their inverses: <\u2191 0 > and <\u2191 1 >. These operators may be used in conjunction with labels. Thus, <\u2193 0 >(e S ) states that the argument daughter is of type-e S . This holds at the top node in the tree (8).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 57, |
| "end": 86, |
| "text": "Blackburn & Meyer-Viol (1994)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF0" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As stated above, a set of requirements drives the application of general, lexical, or pragmatic actions to update a tree state. An action package is in the following conditional format:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(9) IF (input condition) THEN (action; if the condition is met) ELSE (action; if it is not met)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The IF-block is a condition on the node marked by the pointer \u2662. The THEN-block specifies an action to be run if the condition is met whereas the ELSE-block specifies an action to be run if the condition is not met. Let us consider an action package that is encoded in a verb. Since Japanese is pro-drop, it is assumed that all verbs project a propositional template. For instance, the verb hashi (= 'run') generates the tree (10).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(10) Parsing hashi (= 'run') ?t U : e S ?(e S \u2192t)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "V : e hashi' : e\u2192(e S \u2192t), \u2662", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Each argument node is annotated with a metavariable, a place-holding device to be saturated with a term such as Kiki'. The action package to generate the tree (10) is formulated as follows:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(11) Entry of hashi (= 'run') IF ?t THEN make/go(<\u2193 0 >); put(U : e S ); go(<\u2191 0 >) make/go(<\u2193 1 >); put(?(e S \u2192t)); make/go(<\u2193 0 >); put(V : e); go(<\u2191 0 >) make/go(<\u2193 1 >); put(hashi' : e S \u2192(e\u2192t)) ELSE ABORT", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The IF-block declares that a parser performs the actions in the THEN-block iff a current node is a type-t-requiring node. (If this is not met, ABORT applies; the tree update is quitted.) The THENblock consists of primitive actions. make/go(\u03b1) is an action to create a node \u03b1 and move a pointer \u2662 to the node. Since <\u2193 0 > refers to an argument daughter, make/go(<\u2193 0 >) is an action to create an argument daughter and moves a pointer \u2662 to the node. put(\u03b1) is an action to decorate a current node with \u03b1. So, put(?(e S \u2192t)) decorates a current node with ?(e S \u2192t). These atomic actions build the tree (10).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "DS adopts the epsilon calculus for modelling quantification. The epsilon calculus, proposed by David Hilbert, is the logic of arbitrary names in natural deduction in Predicate Logic (Kempson et al., 2001 ). All quantified NPs are mapped onto an epsilon term, a type-e term defined as a triple: a binder, a variable, and a restrictor. For instance, neko (= 'a cat') 2 is mapped onto (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)), where \u03b5 is an epsilon binder (analogous to \u2203), x a variable, and neko'(x) a restrictor. A situation term is notated as SIT in (8) but it is precisely expressed as an epsilon term such as (\u03b5, s, S(s)). (For the situation predicate S, see Cann (2011).)", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 182, |
| "end": 203, |
| "text": "(Kempson et al., 2001", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Once a proposition emerges, each epsilon term is evaluated for scope. This process, Quantifier-Evaluation (Q-Evaluation), explicates the scope dependencies; the restrictor of a term is enriched with the other predicates in the proposition. For instance, the proposition (12) contains two terms. Suppose that the situation term (\u03b5, s, S(s)) outscopes the subject term (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(12) hashi'(\u03b5, x, neko'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s))", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A term having a narrow scope is Q-Evaluated first. So, (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)) is evaluated first, to the effect that (12) is updated to (13). The evaluated epsilon term, abbreviated as a, reflects not only the original predicate neko' but also the predicate hashi' into the restrictor, with the connective & for existential quantification.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(13) neko'(a)&hashi'(a)(\u03b5, s, S(s)) where a = (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)&hashi'(x)(\u03b5, s, S(s)))", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The same procedure then applies to the situation term, and (13) is updated into (14).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(14) S(b)&[neko'(a b )&hashi'(a b )(b)] where b = (\u03b5, s, S(s)&[neko'(a s )&hashi'(a s )(s)]) a b = (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)&hashi'(x)(b)) a s = (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)&hashi'(x)(s))", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The technical detail here is unimportant. What is essential is that (i) Q-Evaluation algorithmically applies to a term in the reverse-order of the scope relation, (ii) each evaluated term reflects the full content of the proposition into the restrictor, and (iii) the output such as (14) explicates the full scope dependency.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In closing this DS exegesis, the LINK device needs to be mentioned. So far, only individual trees have been considered, but two discrete trees may be built up in tandem and paired in virtue of a shared term. This formal tree pairing is called 'LINK.' The LOFT operator <L> refers to the LINKed node from the perspective of a current node. The inverse is defined as <L -1 >. For details, see Sect. 4 and, especially, Sect. 5.1.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sketch of the Formalism", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Progressive growth of a DS tree vis-\u00e0-vis left-toright parsing is illustrated with the string (15). The initial state is the Axiom (16), and a parser incrementally updates this initial tree by running general, lexical, or pragmatic actions.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sample Tree Update", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(15) Neko-ga hashi-tta.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sample Tree Update", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "cat-NOM run-PST 'A cat ran.' ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sample Tree Update", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "hashi'(\u03b5, x, neko'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t, \u2662 (\u03b5, s, S(s)) : e S hashi'(\u03b5, x, neko'(x)) : e S \u2192t (\u03b5, x, neko'(x)) : e hashi' : e\u2192(e S \u2192t)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sample Tree Update", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This is a well-formed final state in that it has no outstanding requirements. The proposition at the top node is Q-Evaluated; see (14) for the output.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Sample Tree Update", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Building on Kurosawa (2003) , Cann et al. (2005) and Kempson & Kurosawa (2009) propose that no in HIRs is a LINK-inducing nominaliser. For instance, consider (20). The parse of (20) up to oite-atta yields the tree (21). The proposition at the top node in (21) is Q-evaluated as in 22 The rest of the process is as usual. Especially, the node decorated with a b is identified as an object node by the accusative case particle o, and tabeprojects a propositional schema, where the object node collapses with the pre-existing object node. The heart of this analysis is that no is regarded as a nominaliser: it maps a proposition onto a term denoting an entity reflecting the proposition. Seraku (in prep.) demonstrates that this entry of no models FRs (Free Relatives), where no is seen to have the nominal status (Tonosaki, 1998) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 12, |
| "end": 27, |
| "text": "Kurosawa (2003)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF17" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 30, |
| "end": 48, |
| "text": "Cann et al. (2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 53, |
| "end": 78, |
| "text": "Kempson & Kurosawa (2009)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF7" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 811, |
| "end": 827, |
| "text": "(Tonosaki, 1998)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF24" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Previous DS Account", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "EQUATION", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 0, |
| "end": 8, |
| "text": "EQUATION", |
| "ref_id": "EQREF", |
| "raw_str": "o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t, \u2662 (\u03b5, s, S(s)) : e S o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)) : e S \u2192t (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)) : e o-a' : e\u2192(e S \u2192t)", |
| "eq_num": "(22)" |
| } |
| ], |
| "section": "A Previous DS Account", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Unlike FRs, however, HIRs possess a number of non-nominal characteristics. First, when the nominaliser no denotes a human, it has a (mostly, derogatory) connotation (cf., Kuroda (1992) (Tonosaki, 1998) . Given that only individual-denoting items may be modified, it seems that an individual is denoted in the FR 26 To sum up, it seems reasonable to assume that HIRs do not denote individuals; see also Seraku (in prep.) for further sets of data that point to the same conclusion. Thus, while the entry of no in Cann et al. (2005) deal with nominalisation data appropriately (Seraku, in prep.) , it cannot predict the non-nominal status of HIRs.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 171, |
| "end": 184, |
| "text": "Kuroda (1992)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF15" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 185, |
| "end": 201, |
| "text": "(Tonosaki, 1998)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF24" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 511, |
| "end": 529, |
| "text": "Cann et al. (2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 574, |
| "end": 592, |
| "text": "(Seraku, in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Previous DS Account", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Further, the entry of no in Cann et al. (2005) fails to account for why only HIRs (but not other types of relatives) are subject to the Relevancy Condition (Kuroda, 1992) . The detail is still a controversy (Kim, 2007) but it requires that the event described by the HIR clause should be a relevant sub-event of the event described by the embedding clause. One construal of relevancy is 'temporal contiguity'; for instance, the HIR (25) cannot be interpreted as: 'A friend cried 1 year ago and Kiki consoled him today.' By contrast, this reading is possible in the FR (24). So, if no in Cann et al. (2005) applies to both HIRs and FRs, the Relevancy Condition asymmetry is left as a mystery.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 156, |
| "end": 170, |
| "text": "(Kuroda, 1992)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF15" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 207, |
| "end": 218, |
| "text": "(Kim, 2007)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 587, |
| "end": 605, |
| "text": "Cann et al. (2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "A Previous DS Account", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "I now propose an alternative DS account of HIRs. The last section has argued for the non-nominal status of HIRs. What remains unclear is why the HIR clause is case-marked, though case particles are usually attached to nominal items.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This apparent conflict is solved if HIRs are regarded as rich context-setters: the proposition of the HIR clause is mapped onto a propositional structure that is partially articulated when it is introduced. The embedding clause will be parsed with this partial tree as context. The partial tree contains two nodes. First, a situation node comes with the requirement that the situation term in this main tree will be in a 'Relevancy' relation to the situation node of the HIR clause. Second, a node for an individual term is present and it is decorated with the content of a head. This makes sure that the head, though internal to the relative clause, is selected by the embedding verb. The position of the node is guided by the case particle. For instance, in the sequence no-ga, where ga is a nominative-case particle, the node of the head is identified as a subject node. I shall propose that this tree update is lexically triggered by the sequence 'no + case particle.' 4 (32) Proposal (see (40) below for formal details)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The unit 'no + case particle' maps the tree of the HIR clause onto a partial tree which involves (i) a situation node decorated with the 'Relevancy' requirement and (ii) a node for an internal head. The node position of the head is signalled by the case particle.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To illustrate (32), consider the HIR (33). The parse of (33) up to oite-atta yields the tree (34) (cf., (21)). The proposition at the top node is then Q-Evaluated as in (35) (cf., (22)). ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Evaluating the proposition in (34)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "S(b)&[ringo'(a b )&o-a'(a b )(b)] where b = (\u03b5, s, S(s)&[ringo'(a s )&o-a'(a s )(s)]) a b = (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)&o-a'(x)(b)) a s = (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)&o-a'(x)(s))", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Now, no-o drives lexical actions. First, it LINKs the type-t node onto the type-t-requiring node.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(36) Parsing (33) up to no-o:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "the part (i) o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t ?t, \u2662", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Second, a parser creates a situation node with the requirement that the term will contain as a subterm a situation term in the previous proposition, in the present case, the situation term b in (35). This is expressed as ?\u2203x.Fo(x)& [b\u2606x] . Fo is a formula predicate (Kempson et al., 2001) and \u2606 stands for whatever relation holds between the events denoted by the HIR and the matrix clauses, as governed by the Relevancy Condition.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 232, |
| "end": 237, |
| "text": "[b\u2606x]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 266, |
| "end": 288, |
| "text": "(Kempson et al., 2001)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(37) Parsing (33) up to no-o:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "the part (ii) o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t ?t, U, ?\u2203x.Fo(x)&[b\u2606x] : e S , \u2662", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "where b is as defined in 35Finally, a parser creates a node for a head. In the present case, this is decorated with a b in (35). 5 The node position is guided by the case particle; in (33), the accusative case particle signals that the term a b is at an object node. This partial tree is a rich context against which the matrix clause is subsequently parsed. Within this partial tree, (i) Kiki-ga introduces a subject node; (ii) the matrix verb tabe (= 'eat') projects a propositional schema; (iii) each argument node collapses with the pre-existing nodes. The final tree state is given in (39). 5 The selection of a term is pragmatically determined. This models the indeterminacy of HIR heads (Kuroda, 1992) . The entry of 'no + case particle' is formally presented as follows:", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 129, |
| "end": 130, |
| "text": "5", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 596, |
| "end": 597, |
| "text": "5", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 694, |
| "end": 708, |
| "text": "(Kuroda, 1992)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF15" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(40) Entry of the unit 'no + case particle' IF t THEN IF \u03c6[(\u03b1 : e S ), (\u03b2 : e)] THEN make/go(<L -1 >); put(?t); make/go(<\u2193 0 >); put(U, ?\u2203x.Fo(x)&[\u03b1\u2606x] : e S ); go(<\u2191 0 >); make/go(<\u00b5>); put(\u03b2 : e) ELSE ABORT ELSE ABORT where \u00b5 \u2208", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "{\u2193 1 \u2193 0 , \u2193 1 \u2193 1 \u2193 0 , \u2193 1 \u2193 1 \u2193 1 \u2193 0 , \u2026}", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u03c6 stands for an evaluated proposition of the HIR clause. \u03b1 is a situation term occurring in \u03c6 and \u03b2 a non-situation term occurring in \u03c6. \u00b5 stands for some LOFT-relation and its value is fixed by a case particle: the nominative case particle selects \u2193 1 \u2193 0 (i.e., subject), the accusative case particle \u2193 1 \u2193 1 \u2193 0 (i.e., object), and the dative case particle \u2193 1 \u2193 1 \u2193 1 \u2193 0 (i.e., indirect object). I shall assume only these three case specifications here, but the set could be enriched (Seraku, in prep.) . One may object that (40) is a stipulation, but Seraku (in prep.) shows that (40) is defined based on the entries of the nominaliser no and the cleft marker no-wa; see Seraku (in prep.) Further, the fusion of no and a case particle is diachronically plausible; these fusions yielded many sentential connectives such as no-ni (= 'though'). Kuroda (2005: 230, fn 37) suggests that such connectives may have developed from the sequence 'no + case particle' through the use of HIRs.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 489, |
| "end": 507, |
| "text": "(Seraku, in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 557, |
| "end": 574, |
| "text": "Seraku (in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 848, |
| "end": 873, |
| "text": "Kuroda (2005: 230, fn 37)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Proposal", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The entry (40) models the non-nominal features of HIRs in Sect. 4. First, no in HIRs is no longer regarded as a nominaliser as conceived in FRs. Thus, the lack of connotation in the HIR 25 In the literature, there is some indication that HIRs exhibit a nominal property (Hoshi, 1995; Kuroda, 2005) . In the HIR (45), the no-part looks as though it stands as a nominal that licenses the numeral quantifier san-mai. 6 (45) Kiki-wa [pan-ga teiburu-ni K-TOP [bread-NOM table-on 6 One may claim that san-mai is licensed by the internal head pan (= 'bread') and it is then floated out of the HIR clause. But this analysis is not plausible because quantifier float is clause-bounded; see Hoshi (1995: 36-50 In our analysis, the unit no-o introduces an object node and decorates it with the evaluated content of the head pan. It is this content that licenses the numeral quantifier san-mai. In fact, as shown in (46), san-mai may be licensed even if there is no overt host NP as long as there is a proper content that denotes a salient object, say, bread. (In DS terms, the object meta-variable posited by tabe (= 'eat') is pragmatically substituted with a content denoting a salient object such as bread.) (46) Kiki-wa san-mai tabeta.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 270, |
| "end": 283, |
| "text": "(Hoshi, 1995;", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 284, |
| "end": 297, |
| "text": "Kuroda, 2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF16" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 474, |
| "end": 475, |
| "text": "6", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 681, |
| "end": 699, |
| "text": "Hoshi (1995: 36-50", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Non-nominal Nature of HIRs", |
| "sec_num": "5.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "K-TOP 3-CL ate 'Kiki ate 3 slices of something (e.g., bread).'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Non-nominal Nature of HIRs", |
| "sec_num": "5.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Another benefit of the entry (40) is that the data in Sect. 2 also follow. First, (40) says nothing about maximality effects. For instance, the term of the internal head in (35), namely a b , as re-cited here as (47), only involves the epsilon binder \u03b5, which is analogous to the existential operator \u2203. So, the term a b itself does not encode maximality. This models the context-dependent nature of the maximality effect as illustrated in (2). Second, in the entry (40), \u03b2 is a term of the internal head. Importantly, (40) does not impose any structural restriction on where \u03b2 is detected within the evaluated proposition. This captures island-insensitivity of HIRs (3).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Maximality, Islands, and Negation", |
| "sec_num": "5.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Third, negation data are also handled. DS has not explored negation but it is reasonable to hold that the negator interacts with quantifiers to fix the scope. In (4), Q-Evaluation may give rise to a proposition where the term of saifu (= 'a wallet') out-scopes the negator. A parser makes a copy of this term and puts it at an object node built by the sequence no-o.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Maximality, Islands, and Negation", |
| "sec_num": "5.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The Relevancy predicate \u2606, though it does not spell out the Relevancy Condition, offers a basis for modelling that only HIRs are subject to the condition. A research avenue is to substantiate \u2606", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Relevancy Condition", |
| "sec_num": "5.4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This paper views Japanese HIRs as rich contextsetters: the unit 'no + case particle' encodes the procedures to map the tree of the HIR clause onto a partially-articulated tree. This partial tree is a 'rich' context against which the immediately embedding clause is processed. The partial tree contains two nodes:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Conclusion", |
| "sec_num": "7" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 First, there is a situation node annotated with the relational predicate \u2606. This provides a basis for modelling that only HIRs are subject to the Relevancy Condition.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Conclusion", |
| "sec_num": "7" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 Second, there is an individual term decorated with the content of a head. This ensures that the head, though internal to the HIR clause, is licensed by the embedding verb.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Conclusion", |
| "sec_num": "7" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This account predicts a range of HIR properties, including the data that would pose a problem for recent analyses of HIRs (e.g., maximality, islandinsensitivity, negation, the locality restriction on the Relevancy Condition). It has also been shown that the nominaliser no (Cann et al., 2005) does not model HIRs but CRs. For additional sets of predictions, see Seraku (in prep.) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 273, |
| "end": 292, |
| "text": "(Cann et al., 2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 362, |
| "end": 379, |
| "text": "Seraku (in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Conclusion", |
| "sec_num": "7" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Kuroda (2005) suggests that the Complex NP Constraint may be at work. At the same time, however, he notes that the HIR involving the complex NP is not totally degraded.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Japanese lacks determiners. Thus, the quantificational force of bare NPs is contextually determined.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Formally, the general action Local *Adjunction induces an unfixed node, to be decorated by neko and to be fixed as a subject node by the nominative case particle ga.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Seraku (in prep.) argues that the sequence 'no + the topic particle wa' models clefs. Like HIRs, a propositional tree is mapped onto another propositional tree. In this view, clefts are regarded as context-setters: the pre-no-wa part sets a context for the focus item to be parsed. But unlike HIRs, the mapped tree in clefts lacks internal structure (i.e., it is not partially articulated when it is induced.) Hence, clefts as context-setters, and HIRs as rich context-setters.PACLIC-27", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Contrary to our expectation, CRs do not have connotation when they denote humans(Tonosaki, 1998). In this respect, CRs behave more like HIRs. This is a residual problem.PACLIC-27", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [ |
| { |
| "text": "I am grateful to anonymous PACLIC reviewers for their helpful comments on the earlier version of the present paper. I would also like to thank Ruth Kempson and Jieun Kiaer for constructive exchange. All inadequacies are solely due to the author. This work is supported by the Sasakawa Fund Scholarship.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Acknowledgements", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "by representing aspects and tense within situation terms (cf., (Cann, 2011) ).Still, the entry (40) at its present form makes a novel prediction: the condition holds between the HIR clause and its immediate embedding clause. Consider (48). The HIR clause has to be relevant to the intermediate clause Kiki-ga tabeta but not to the matrix clause Jiji-ga itta. Thus, (48) may have the reading: 'There was an apple and Kiki ate it. Then, 3 years later, Jiji said about it.' This restriction is predicted by the entry (40) since \u2606 is put at a situation node in the structure of the immediately embedding clause. 48 Kim 's E-type analysis, the HIR clause moves and adjoins to a higher AspP. So, it must be assumed that it does not move over the AspP for Kiki-ga tabeta. In the ChR account, the null OP at Spec of ChRP may undergo successive cyclic A'-movement. Thus, it must be assumed that the null OP does not move up to Spec of CP within the matrix clause. These assumptions may be justified in terms of computational economy, but no such justification is as yet provided.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 63, |
| "end": 75, |
| "text": "(Cann, 2011)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 611, |
| "end": 614, |
| "text": "Kim", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "annex", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "It is argued that Cann et al.'s (2005) entry of no is not applicable to HIRs. Then, is this entry to be eliminated? The answer is negative. First, it treats no-nominalisation data (Seraku, in prep.) . Second, as will be argued below, it also accounts for CRs (Change Relatives), a much less studied type of Japanese relatives.CRs denote the 'state of change,' as illustrated in (49) (Tonosaki, 1998: 144 Finally, like FRs but unlike HIRs, the Relevancy Condition is inert in CRs. For instance, (49) may be interpreted as: 'A tadpole became a frog 2 years ago and it is now hopping in the garden.' These additional data corroborate Tonosaki's claim that CRs are more like FRs than HIRs. Given that the entry of no in Cann et al. (2005) models FRs (Seraku, in prep.) , it is reasonable to assume that this entry of no applies to CRs (but not HIRs). More specifically, the parse of (49) up to natta yields a propositional content and the nominaliser no then picks out a term within the evaluated proposition and annotates a new type-e node with the term. This node is reflected into the propositional tree constructed by the matrix verb haneteiru. For details, see Seraku (in prep.) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 18, |
| "end": 38, |
| "text": "Cann et al.'s (2005)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 180, |
| "end": 198, |
| "text": "(Seraku, in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 383, |
| "end": 403, |
| "text": "(Tonosaki, 1998: 144", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 716, |
| "end": 734, |
| "text": "Cann et al. (2005)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 746, |
| "end": 764, |
| "text": "(Seraku, in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 1162, |
| "end": 1179, |
| "text": "Seraku (in prep.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Change Relatives (CRs)", |
| "sec_num": "6" |
| } |
| ], |
| "bib_entries": { |
| "BIBREF0": { |
| "ref_id": "b0", |
| "title": "Linguistics, logic and finite trees", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "P", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Blackburn", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "W", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Meyer-Viol", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1994, |
| "venue": "Bulletin of the IGPL", |
| "volume": "2", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "3--31", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Blackburn, P. & Meyer-Viol, W. 1994. Linguistics, logic and finite trees. Bulletin of the IGPL 2: 3-31.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF1": { |
| "ref_id": "b1", |
| "title": "Towards an Account of the English Auxiliary System", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Cann", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2011, |
| "venue": "The Dynamics of Lexical Interfaces. CSLI", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Cann, R. 2011. Towards an Account of the English Auxiliary System, In Kempson, R. et al. (Eds.) The Dynamics of Lexical Interfaces. CSLI, Stanford.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF2": { |
| "ref_id": "b2", |
| "title": "The Dynamics of Language", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Cann", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kempson", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Marten", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "L", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2005, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Cann, R., Kempson, R., and Marten, L. 2005. The Dynamics of Language. Elsevier, Oxford.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF3": { |
| "ref_id": "b3", |
| "title": "The logical form of action sentences", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "D", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Davidson", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1967, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Davidson, D. 1967. The logical form of action sentences. In Rescher, N. (Ed.) The Logic of Decision and Actions. UPS, Pittsburgh.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF4": { |
| "ref_id": "b4", |
| "title": "The status of the internally-headed relatives of Japanese/Korean within the typology of definite relatives", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Grosu", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2010, |
| "venue": "JEAL", |
| "volume": "19", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "231--274", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Grosu, A. 2010. The status of the internally-headed relatives of Japanese/Korean within the typology of definite relatives. JEAL, 19: 231-274.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF5": { |
| "ref_id": "b5", |
| "title": "A quantificational disclosure approach to Japanese and Korean internally headed relatives", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Grosu", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "F", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Landman", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2012, |
| "venue": "JEAL", |
| "volume": "21", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "159--196", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Grosu, A. & Landman, F. 2012. A quantificational disclosure approach to Japanese and Korean internally headed relatives. JEAL, 21: 159-196.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF6": { |
| "ref_id": "b6", |
| "title": "Structural and Interpretive Aspects of Head-Internal and Head-External Relative Clauses", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "K", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Hoshi", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1995, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Hoshi, K. 1995. Structural and Interpretive Aspects of Head-Internal and Head-External Relative Clauses. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Rochester.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF7": { |
| "ref_id": "b7", |
| "title": "At the syntaxpragmatics interface", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kempson", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kurosawa", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2009, |
| "venue": "The Dynamics and Mechanism of Language", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kempson, R. & Kurosawa, A. 2009. At the syntax- pragmatics interface. In Hoshi, H. (Ed.) The Dynamics and Mechanism of Language. Kuroshio, Tokyo.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF8": { |
| "ref_id": "b8", |
| "title": "Dynamic Syntax", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kempson", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "W", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Meyer-Viol", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "D", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Gabbay", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2001, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W., and Gabbay, D. 2001. Dynamic Syntax. Blackwell, Oxford.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF9": { |
| "ref_id": "b9", |
| "title": "Formal linking in internally headed relatives", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [ |
| "J" |
| ], |
| "last": "Kim", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2007, |
| "venue": "NALS", |
| "volume": "15", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "279--315", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kim, M. J. 2007. Formal linking in internally headed relatives. NALS, 15: 279-315.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF10": { |
| "ref_id": "b10", |
| "title": "Relevance of grammar and pragmatics to the Relevancy Condition", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [ |
| "J" |
| ], |
| "last": "Kim", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2008, |
| "venue": "Language Research", |
| "volume": "44", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "95--120", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kim, M. J. 2008a. Relevance of grammar and pragmatics to the Relevancy Condition. Language Research, 44: 95-120.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF11": { |
| "ref_id": "b11", |
| "title": "Event Structure and Internallyheaded Relative Clauses", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [ |
| "J" |
| ], |
| "last": "Kim", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2008, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kim, M. J. 2008b. Event Structure and Internally- headed Relative Clauses. VDN Verlag Dr. Mueller, Saarbrucken.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF12": { |
| "ref_id": "b12", |
| "title": "E-type anaphora and three types of kes-construction in Korean", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [ |
| "J" |
| ], |
| "last": "Kim", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2009, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "27", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "345--77", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kim, M. J. 2009. E-type anaphora and three types of kes-construction in Korean. NLLT, 27: 345-77.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF13": { |
| "ref_id": "b13", |
| "title": "Typological variations of headinternal relatives in Japanese", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "C", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kitagawa", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2005, |
| "venue": "Lingua", |
| "volume": "115", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "1243--76", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kitagawa, C. 2005. Typological variations of head- internal relatives in Japanese. Lingua, 115: 1243- 76.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF14": { |
| "ref_id": "b14", |
| "title": "The Japanese internally headed relative clause is not an E-type pronoun", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Y", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kubota", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "E", |
| "middle": [ |
| "A" |
| ], |
| "last": "Smith", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2007, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "55", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kubota, Y. & Smith, E. A. 2007. The Japanese internally headed relative clause is not an E-type pronoun. In Miyamoto, Y. & Ochi, M. (Eds.) MITWPL 55. MIT Press, MA, Cambridge.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF15": { |
| "ref_id": "b15", |
| "title": "Japanese Syntax and Semantics", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S.-Y", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kuroda", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1992, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kuroda, S.-Y. 1992. Japanese Syntax and Semantics. Kluwer, Dordrecht.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF16": { |
| "ref_id": "b16", |
| "title": "Nihongo-kara Mita Seisei Bunpo. (Generative Grammar from the Perspective of Japanese) Iwanami", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S.-Y", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kuroda", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2005, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kuroda, S.-Y. 2005. Nihongo-kara Mita Seisei Bunpo. (Generative Grammar from the Perspective of Japanese) Iwanami, Tokyo.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF17": { |
| "ref_id": "b17", |
| "title": "On the Interaction of Syntax and Pragmatics", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kurosawa", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2003, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kurosawa, A. 2003. On the Interaction of Syntax and Pragmatics. Ph.D. thesis, King's College London.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF18": { |
| "ref_id": "b18", |
| "title": "Event sensitivity of head-internal relatives in Japanese", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Y", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Matsuda", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2002, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Matsuda, Y. 2002. Event sensitivity of head-internal relatives in Japanese. In Akatsuka, N. et al. (Eds.)", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF19": { |
| "ref_id": "b19", |
| "title": "Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10. CSLI", |
| "authors": [], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Japanese/Korean Linguistics 10. CSLI, Stanford.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF20": { |
| "ref_id": "b20", |
| "title": "Nihongo-no Togo Kozo", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "K", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Mihara", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1994, |
| "venue": "Syntactic Structure of Japanese) Syohakusya", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Mihara, K. 1994. Nihongo-no Togo Kozo. (Syntactic Structure of Japanese) Syohakusya, Tokyo.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF21": { |
| "ref_id": "b21", |
| "title": "prep. Clefts, Relatives, and Language Dynamics. D.Phil. thesis", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "T", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Seraku", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Seraku, T. in prep. Clefts, Relatives, and Language Dynamics. D.Phil. thesis, University of Oxford.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF22": { |
| "ref_id": "b22", |
| "title": "Internally headed relative clauses in Japanese and E-type anaphora", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "J", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Shimoyama", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1999, |
| "venue": "JEAL", |
| "volume": "8", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "147--82", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Shimoyama, J. 1999. Internally headed relative clauses in Japanese and E-type anaphora. JEAL, 8: 147-82.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF23": { |
| "ref_id": "b23", |
| "title": "Wh-Constructions in Japanese", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "J", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Shimoyama", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2001, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Shimoyama, J. 2001. Wh-Constructions in Japanese. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF24": { |
| "ref_id": "b24", |
| "title": "Change-relatives in Japanese", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Tonosaki", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1998, |
| "venue": "Journal of Japanese Linguistics", |
| "volume": "16", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "143--60", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Tonosaki, S. 1998. Change-relatives in Japanese. Journal of Japanese Linguistics, 16: 143-60.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF25": { |
| "ref_id": "b25", |
| "title": "Wh and operator constructions in Japanese", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Watanabe", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 2003, |
| "venue": "Lingua", |
| "volume": "113", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "519--58", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Watanabe, A. 2003. Wh and operator constructions in Japanese. Lingua, 113: 519-58.", |
| "links": null |
| } |
| }, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF0": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "Evaluating the proposition in (21)S(b)&[ringo'(a b )&o-a'(a b )(b)] where b = (\u03b5, s, S(s)&[ringo'(a s )&o-a'(a s )(s)]) a b = (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)&o-a'(x)(b)) a s = (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)&o-a'(x)(s))Now, no (i) initiates a LINK relation to a type-erequiring node and (ii) decorates the node with a term in the evaluated proposition (in this case, a b in (22)). In the tree display (23), a LINK relation is expressed by a curved arrow:(23) Parsing the string (20) up to no o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t a b : e, \u2662where a b is as defined in (22)." |
| }, |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "33) [Ringo-ga oite-atta no]-o [apple-NOM place-existed NO]-ACC Kiki-ga tabe-ta. K-NOM eat-PST 'There was an apple and Kiki ate it.' (34) Parsing the string (33) up to oite-atta o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t, \u2662 (\u03b5, s, S(s)) : e S o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)) : e S \u2192t (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)) : e o-a' : e\u2192(e S \u2192t)" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "Parsing (33) up to no-o: the part (iii) o-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t ?t U, ?\u2203x.Fo(x)&[b\u2606x] : e S ?(e S \u2192t) ?(e\u2192(e S \u2192t)) a b : e, \u2662 where a b and b are as defined in (35)" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "Parsing the whole string (33): final stateo-a'(\u03b5, x, ringo'(x))(\u03b5, s, S(s)) : t tabe'(a b )(Kiki')(\u03b5, t, T(t)) : t,\u2662 c : e S tabe'(a b )(Kiki') : e S \u2192t Kiki' : e tabe'(a b ) : e\u2192(e S \u2192t) a b : e tabe' : e\u2192(e\u2192(e S \u2192t)) where c = Fo(\u03b5, t, T(t))&[b\u2606(\u03b5, t, T(t))] a b and b are as defined in (35)" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF4": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "47) a b = (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)&o-a'(x)(b)) b = (\u03b5, s, S(s)&[ringo'(a s )&o-a'(a s )(s)]) a s = (\u03b5, x, ringo'(x)&o-a'(x)(s))" |
| }, |
| "TABREF0": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "place-existed NO]-ACC K-NOM ate 'An apple was on a table and Kiki ate it.' This paper addresses Japanese HIRs in Dynamic Syntax", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td>GEN-top-at</td></tr><tr><td>oite-atta</td><td>no]-o</td><td>Kiki-ga tabeta.</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF2": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "Two daughter nodes at the bottom are specified for content and type. Thus, functional application and type deduction compute the content and type of the mother node. This process, formulated as the general action Elimination, also applies to the intermediate argument-functor pair, yielding the decoration at the top node.", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>Axiom</td><td/></tr><tr><td>?t, \u2662</td><td/></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">First, the actions encoded in neko and ga induce</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">a subject node decorated with the content of neko</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">and the logical type e. 3</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">(17) Parsing Neko-ga</td></tr><tr><td>?t, \u2662</td><td/></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">?(e S \u2192t)</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">(18) Parsing Neko-ga hashi-tta (ignoring tense)</td></tr><tr><td>?t, \u2662</td><td/></tr><tr><td>U : e S</td><td>?(e S \u2192t)</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF4": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "). So, no in the FR (24) may have such connotation but no in the HIR (25) does not. This suggests that individuals are not denoted in HIRs.", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>(24) [Naita no]-o</td><td>Kiki-ga nagusameta.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">[cried NO]-ACC K-NOM consoled</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">'Kiki consoled a person who cried.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">(25) [Tomodachi-ga naita no]-o</td></tr><tr><td>[friend-NOM</td><td>cried NO]-ACC</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">Kiki-ga nagusameta.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">K-NOM consoled</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">'A friend cried and Kiki consoled him.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">Second, the relative clause is modifiable by</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">demonstratives in FRs but not in HIRs</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF5": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "but not in the HIR(27). Kiki consoled Tombo, who cried.'Finally, a focus position in clefts is occupied by FRs, but not HIRs. Given that only a nominal item is focussed in Japanese clefts(Seraku, in prep.), it follows that FRs, but not HIRs, denote a nominal entity.", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>(26) Sono that Jiji-ga tabeta. [Kiki-ga katta no]-o [K-NOM bought NO]-ACC J-NOM ate 'Jiji ate that thing which Kiki bought.' (27) *Sono [Kiki-ga ringo-o katta that [K-NOM apple-ACC bought no]-o Jiji-ga tabeta. NO]-ACC J-NOM ate 'Kiki ate that apple and Jiji ate it.' Third, FRs but not HIRs may offer an answer to wh-questions asking about an individual (cf., Matsuda (2002)). For instance, the wh-question Who did Kiki console? may be answered by the FR (28) but not by the HIR (29). (28) [Naita no]-o nagusameta. [cried NO]-ACC consoled 'Kiki consoled a person who cried.' (29) \u266f[Tombo-ga naita no]-o nagusameta. [T-NOM cried NO]-ACC consoled Int. '(30) [Kiki-ga tabeta no]-wa [Osono-ga [K-NOM ate NO]-TOP [O-NOM yaita no] da. baked NO] COP 'It is [the thing that Osono baked] that Kiki ate.' (31) *[Kiki-ga tabeta no]-wa [Osono-ga [K-NOM ate NO]-TOP [O-NOM pan-o yaita no] da. bread-ACC baked NO] COP 'It is Osono's baked bread that Kiki ate.'</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF6": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "Kiki ate that apple and Jiji ate it.' Third, since the mapped tree is of type-t, it is also expected that HIRs cannot offer an answer to wh-questions asking about individuals. This is why the HIR (29), repeated here as (43), cannot answer to the question Who did Kiki console?", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td/><td/><td/><td>,</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">repeated here as (41), is anticipated.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">(41) [Tomodachi-ga naita no]-o</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">[friend-NOM</td><td colspan=\"2\">cried NO]-ACC</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">Kiki-ga nagusameta.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">K-NOM consoled</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">'A friend cried and Kiki consoled him.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">Second, in our analysis, the tree of the HIR</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">clause is mapped onto a type-t-requiring node.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">This is contrasted with FRs, where no maps the</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">tree of the relative clause onto a type-e-requiring</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">node. Provided that demonstratives only modify</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">a type-e item, it is thus expected that they cannot</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">modify HIRs. Consider (27), re-cited here as (42).</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">(42) *Sono [Kiki-ga ringo-o</td><td>katta</td></tr><tr><td>that</td><td colspan=\"3\">[K-NOM apple-ACC bought</td></tr><tr><td>no]-o</td><td colspan=\"2\">Jiji-ga</td><td>tabeta.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">NO]-ACC J-NOM</td><td>ate</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">'(43) \u266f[Tombo-ga naita no]-o</td><td>nagusameta.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">[T-NOM</td><td colspan=\"2\">cried NO]-ACC consoled</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">Int. 'Kiki consoled Tombo, who cried.'</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">For the same reason, the HIR (31), reproduced</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">here as (44), cannot be at a type-e focus position.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">(44) *[Kiki-ga tabeta no]-wa [Osono-ga</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">[K-NOM ate</td><td>NO]-TOP [O-NOM</td></tr><tr><td>pan-o</td><td/><td colspan=\"2\">yaita no] da.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">bread-ACC baked NO] COP</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">'It is Osono's baked bread that Kiki ate.'</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF7": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "Kiki ate 3 slices of bread on a table.' But (45) does not show the nominality of HIRs.", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>oiteatta</td><td>no]-o</td><td colspan=\"2\">san-mai tabeta.</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"3\">place.existed NO]-ACC 3-CL</td><td>ate</td></tr><tr><td>'</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td>).</td><td/><td/></tr></table>", |
| "html": null, |
| "num": null |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
