By Alexander Williams

Argument constitution - the trend of underlying family among a predicate and its dependents - is on the base of syntactic idea and the idea of the interface with semantics. This complete consultant explores the causes for thematic and event-structural decomposition, and its relation to constitution in syntax. It additionally discusses huge styles within the linking of syntactic to semantic relatives, and comprises insightful case experiences on passive and resultative structures. Semantically specific and syntactically neutral, with a cautious, interrogative procedure, Williams clarifies notions of argument inside of either lexicalist and nonlexicalist techniques. excellent for college kids and researchers in syntactic and semantic conception, this creation contains: • A finished assessment of arguments in syntax and semantics • dialogue questions and recommendations for additional examining • A thesaurus with valuable definitions of key phrases.

Show description

Read Online or Download Arguments in Syntax and Semantics PDF

Similar semantics books

Verb Meaning and the Lexicon: A First Phase Syntax

Книга Verb that means and the Lexicon: a primary section Syntax Verb that means and the Lexicon: a primary section Syntax Книги Иностранные языки Автор: Gillian Catriona Ramchand Год издания: 2008 Формат: pdf Издат. :Cambridge collage Press Страниц: 228 Размер: 1,2 ISBN: 0521842409 Язык: Английский0 (голосов: zero) Оценка:The dating among the which means of phrases and the constitution of sentences is a crucial quarter of study in linguistics.

Drawing the Boundaries of Meaning: Neo-Gricean studies in pragmatics and semantics in honor of Laurence R. Horn (Studies in Language Companion Series)

Some of the most energetic and contentious matters in modern linguistic thought issues the elusive boundary among semantics and pragmatics, and Professor Laurence R. Horn of Yale collage has been on the heart of that discuss ever considering his groundbreaking 1972 UCLA dissertation. This quantity in honor of Horn brings jointly the easiest of present paintings on the semantics/pragmatics boundary from a neo-Gricean viewpoint.

Morpheme Order and Semantic Scope: Word Formation in the Athapaskan Verb

Athapaskan languages are of serious linguistic curiosity because of their tricky morphology. during this transparent and insightful e-book, Keren Rice deals a wealthy survey of morpheme ordering in Athapaskan verbs, with implications for either synchronic grammar and language swap. She argues that verb constitution is predictable throughout Athapaskan languages if convinced summary features of that means are thought of.

Roots and Patterns: Hebrew Morpho-syntax

This publication is concurrently a theoretical research in morphosyntax and an in-depth empirical research of Hebrew. in line with Hebrew facts, the publication defends the prestige of the basis as a lexical and phonological unit and argues that roots, instead of verbs or nouns, are the primitives of note formation. A significant declare made through the ebook is the position of locality in note formation, teasing aside observe formation from roots and note formation from latest phrases syntactically, semantically and phonologically.

Extra info for Arguments in Syntax and Semantics

Example text

C Application[ won , Obama ] = True Conjunction[f, g] is an operation over two functions f and g. The operation yields a new function, h, equivalent to λx[fx & gx]. For example, if the values of won and cried are functions that yield True just for those who won and those who cried, respectively, then the Conjunction of those two values is a new function that yields True just for those who both won and cried. The operation is defined in (38). (38) a Conjunction[f, g] is defined if and only if f and g share the same domain, and both have as their range the truth values True and False b Conjunction[f, g] = the function h such that, for any x in the shared domain of f and g: i x, True ∈ h ↔ [ x, True ∈ f] and [ x, True ∈ g], and ii x, False ∈ h ↔ [ x, False ∈ f] or [ x, False ∈ g], and iii nothing else is in h.

Second, one might read the formulas as indicating concepts or thoughts in the mind, rather than as mind-external objects. So instead of taking (25) to stand for a set of objects and truth values, one can take it to stand for a mental concept, and instead of taking (26) to stand for a truth value, one can take it to stand for a thought. Third, one might read the predicates in our formulas not as standing for a single value, but as a pointer to a family of related values, from which one must be chosen in interpreting tokens of the expression.

So to say that an expression has a structured semantic value is to say more than just that its meaning is derived. Among linguists of an objectivist stripe, structured semantic values are these days uncommon. Such linguists rely mainly on sets of ordered pairs – pairs of individuals and truth values, pairs of possible worlds and truth values, and so forth – and these sets have no structure to match that of the expression. But objectivism is not tied conceptually to structureless values. An objectivist can say, with no appeal to psychology, that the value of Obama won is a structure, comprising Obama and the property of victory, that matches the subject–predicate form of the clause (Russell 1903, Soames 1987, King 1995, 1996).

Download PDF sample

Arguments in Syntax and Semantics by Alexander Williams
Rated 4.62 of 5 – based on 11 votes