The future of English linguistics as envisaged by the editors of Topics in English Linguistics lies in empirical studies which integrate work in English linguistics into general and theoretical ...linguistics on the one hand, and comparative linguistics on the other. The TiEL series features volumes that present interesting new data and analyses, and above all fresh approaches that contribute to the overall aim of the series, which is to further outstanding research in English linguistics.
It has been proposed that the part structures of denotations of plurals ‘project’ to the denotations of expressions including those plurals (e.g., Gawron & Kehler 2004, Kubota & Levine 2016, Schmitt ...2019/2020). If such a plural projection is possible, not only plural DPs but also expressions including those plural DPs denote pluralities (e.g., saw the two recipes denotes a plurality {SAW(recipe1),SAW(recipe2)} instead of a singularity {SAW({recipe1,recipe2})}). One piece of support for plural projection comes from Schmitt’s (2020) observation about ‘non-local’ cumulativity. In this paper, I further examine when cumulativity is available non-locally, and show that a source of cumulativity in the literature (e.g., Krifka 1989, Kratzer 2007, Harada 2022b) can capture all the relevant non-local cumulativity data without plural projection while an analysis with plural projection can capture only a proper subset of those data. Therefore, this paper concludes that the relevant non-local cumulativity does not support the need of plural projection.
Studies of collocations to date have emphasised use and learning of noun–verb and adjective–noun collocations. This study uses three sub-corpora of the ICLE corpus to investigate use of noun–noun ...collocations by learners in their academic writing. The literature to date has focused on contexts where English is being learnt as a foreign language rather than as a second language. The study therefore compares the influence of ESL and EFL learning contexts on learner use of noun–noun collocations. Findings are that accuracy of noun–noun phrases is significantly greater in the writing of ESL learners. A second question considered is what influence the presence or absence of noun–noun phrases in the first language (L1) has on learner use of these phrases in English. For this purpose, production of noun–noun phrases in written English by L1 Mandarin writers (a language that permits noun–noun phrases) is compared to writing by L1 Spanish writers (a language that does not allow noun–noun phrases). Findings are that learners whose L1 permits noun–noun phrases produce significantly more of them in English than learners whose L1 does not. Problems that learners had in forming noun–noun phrases are discussed qualitatively, and implications for EAP teaching are suggested.
•L2 writers produce more noun–noun phrases if their L1 allows noun–noun phrases.•Writers whose L1 allows n–n phrases produced more correct & more incorrect phrases.•An ESL context promotes production of n–n phrases more than an EFL context.•Writers in an ESL context were more accurate in their noun–noun phrase production.
This article motivates and develops a compositional account for bare noun incorporation (BNI) constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Mandarin BNI constructions, taking the form of V-O compounds, exhibit ...a constellation of properties (e.g., obligatory narrow scope, institutionalized meaning, reduced discourse capacity, restricted modification of incorporated nominals, etc.) which are typically associated with (pseudo-)incorporated structures in other languages. However, unlike other attested (pseudo-)incorporated structures, which are mostly verbal in nature, BNI constructions can be freely used as arguments, akin to nominalized expressions. Integrating the analytical insights from both the advances in the theories of kinds (Chierchia in Nat Lang Semant 6: 339–405, 1998; Gehrke in Nat Lang Linguist Theory 33: 897–938, 2015) and in the theories of incorporation (Dayal in Nat Lang Linguist Theory 29: 123–167, 2011; Schwarzs in
Weak referentiality
, John Benjamins, 2014), the article proposes an event kind-based analysis by treating BNI constructions as expressions of Chierchia-style kinds in the domain of events, where the (proto-typical) theme arguments instantiating the bare noun complements form part of the event kinds rather than function as independent semantic arguments to the verbs. Extending the notion of kinds from the domain of individuals to the domain of events has not only provided a motivated account of the paradoxical properties of BNI constructions which would otherwise defy formal treatment, but also bridged two lines of research previously thought to be independent of each other, viz. the semantics of kinds which are mostly confined to the domain of individuals and the semantics of events which are mostly confined to canonical verbal expressions.
Morphemes combined with the Arabic noun exhibit many puzzling properties, still unaccounted for in the literature. This book proposes a new, unified explanation, analyzing these morphemes as copulae, ...with the constructions in which they occur as instances of predication.
•The article offers novel data on Mandarin adpositions, localisers, spatial nouns.•It explores these data at an intra- and inter-sentential level.•The account is the first to capture these data.•The ...analysis has potentially cross-linguistic applications.•General considerations are offered for a theory of spatial categories.
The goal of this paper is to show that Mandarin localisers and spatial nouns (e.g. qian ‘front’ and qian-mian ‘front-side’, respectively) are part of a nominal super-category but display complementary discourse properties. At the sentential level, both categories can be combined with prepositions (e.g. zai zhuozi hou ‘behind the table’), and form phrases and sentences describing the location of an entity under discussion. At the discourse level, however, only spatial nouns can act as anaphors to previous prepositional phrases, thereby licensing ground NP ellipsis. We show that their differing discourse properties depend on their grammatical properties, and determine how anaphoric relations are established: spatial nouns always introduce direct reference to discourse-relevant locations. We offer a formal account based on a combination of Lexical Syntax with Discourse Representation Theory, and discuss the consequences of this account for a theory of spatial categories in Mandarin.
Noun Phrase In Minang Language Akmal, Akmal; Nasution, Jamaluddin
Aksara (Gorontalo. Indonesia),
09/2021, Letnik:
7, Številka:
3
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Odprti dostop
Phrase structure rules express the basic structural facts of the language in the form of “phrase markers”. This study discussed about the noun phrase in Minangkabau Language. The aim of this study is ...to find out the noun phrases of Minangkabau Language and how the noun phrases are used in the language. The used method is qualitative research design by interviewing the native speakers of Minangkabau by using the depth interview. the participants are the people who lived in Sukaramai Districts. They were born in Pariaman Districts and they are educated people who understand about the phrase structure.The researcher described the finding data more details. In this study, there are six noun phrase forms in Minangkabau Language and there is one unique form. The noun phrases are implicated in the daily activity of society. In fact, there was a unique noun phrase in Minang Language namely: Noun Phrase (NP) is N1 + sa + N2.
Genericity encompasses two distinct phenomena. The first one is reference to a kind, whereby a predicate describes a property directly of a kind as in Dinosaurs are extinct. The second one is a ...characterizing or a generic sentence that expresses generalizations as in Cats meow. A feature of generic sentences is that they tolerate exceptions. We accept sentences such as Mosquitos carry the West Nile virus to be true although the predicated property characterizes less than 1 percent of the generic noun phrase.
In this article, I propose a feature‐based account of genericity and kind reference linked to a formal semantics that articulates the features responsible for genericity and kind reference and where they are encoded. I argue that genericity and kind reference is due to the −domain restriction feature encoded on the (D)eterminer, the +set feature on the head of the Set Phrase, and the +/−exception tolerance feature encoded on a predicate. This feature‐based account explains why a sentence like Cats meow is tolerant of exceptions while Dinosaurs are extinct is not. My account is in line with the Borer‐Chomsky Conjecture (Baker 2008), according to which crosslinguistic parametric variation is due to differences in the features of functional heads.
PDF
