The architecture ofit-clefts

Abstract

This paper examines quasi-monoclausal left-peripheral analyses of English it-clefts.Though attractive because such analyses bring out commonalities between it-clefts on the one hand and focus fronting and wh-questions on the other, the range of word order variations available in English it-clefts reveals that such monoclausal analyses of it-clefts lead to considerable complications of implementation, ultimately undoing the gain in terms of economy that initially would seem to justify them. In particular, we will show that, on closer inspection, the presumed focus fronting in it-clefts cannot be targeting the position deployed for ' regular ' left-peripheral focus fronting. Moreover, both implementations of the monoclausal analysis discussed make the wrong predictions with respect to the distribution of it-clefts. In particular, as already argued by Hooper & Thompson (1973) and Emonds (1976), English it-clefting, unlike ' regular ' focus fronting, is not a main clause phenomenon. Given these objections, we conclude that the left-peripheral analyses of it-clefts are ill-founded. for discussion. Thanks to three anonymous referees of Journal of Linguistics for thorough and thought-provoking comments. On the basis of their comments and extensive suggestions we have been able to sharpen our minds about the core issues of our paper. Obviously, they are not responsible for the way we have used their comments.

Tensor product methods and entanglement optimization for ab initio quantum chemistry

“…[173] Although this shows that tensor product approximation in principle is an extremely difficult task, a variety of generic concepts for the approximation of solutions of certain problem classes have recently been proposed, [46,47] some of which [45,116,[174][175][176][177][178] bear a surprising similarity to methods used to treat problems in quantum physics. [179,180] The classical Tucker format attains sparsity via a subspace approximation. Multiconfigurational methods like MCSCF or CASSCF are in fact a Tucker approximation in the framework of antisymmetry.…”

“…Also, these sets possess a manifold structure that helps to remove redundancy in the parametrization by the introduction of so-called gauge conditions. [184] They can be used to set up variational frameworks for the treatment of optimization problems [42] and of time-dependent problems, [176,177,180,185] bearing again a close connection to approaches in the quantum physics community. [179] In this general context, the robustness and quasi-best approximation of the HOSVD, studied in the mathematics community, [45,46,186] and of the (one site) DMRG [187] as simple and very efficient numerical methods for the treatment of optimization problems are now well-understood.…”

“…However, Verstraete developed an injectivity condition that aims at overcoming that problem for uniform MPS with periodic boundary conditions. [180]…”

“…and a solution can be computed with the aforementioned methods, [47,177,180,206,212,213] see Figure 9.…”

Be careful how you use the left periphery

“…For arguments against a left periphery analysis of clefts see Haegeman, Meinunger and Vercauteren (2014).…”