The Autonomy of the (Syntactic) Lexicon and Syntax: Insertion Conditions for Derivational and Inflectional Morphemes

Emonds, Joseph E.

doi:10.1007/978-94-011-3818-5_7

Cited by 10 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Verbs of temporal aspect in English provide us with another verbal context, as their complement can be only a verb phrase (9a), not an adjective phrase (9b) (Emonds, 1991). Again, all present participles can appear as complements of these verbs (10), reinforcing the conclusion that they are verbal.…”

Section: Syntactic Evidence For the Verbal Status Of Present Participlesmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The studies differed in their conclusion, depending on the diagnostics they perceived as most central or reliable. Brekke (1988) and Emonds (1991) seem to attribute much importance to -ly suffixation and the degree modifiers data (to be presented in sections 2.2.2 and 2.2.5), therefore concluding that not all present participles have an adjectival reading. On the other hand, Borer (1990), Bresnan (1996), andParsons (1990) took the prenominal modification facts (to be presented in section 2.2.8) to be crucial, and concluded that all present participles are adjectival.…”

Section: Syntactic Evidence Regarding the Adjectival Status Of Presenmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In addition, although there are several attempts at a comprehensive study of the present participle morpheme -ing (see in particular Milsark, 1988;Emonds, 1991), none of them present a detailed account of the process of adjectival present participle formation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Present participles: Categorial classification and derivation

Meltzer‐Asscher

2010

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Syntactic Evidence For the Verbal Status Of Present Participlesmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Syntactic Evidence Regarding the Adjectival Status Of Presenmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Present participles: Categorial classification and derivation

Meltzer‐Asscher

2010

Lingua

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…For discussion of economy principles which reconcile lexical features with general syntactic requirements, see Emonds (1990). In particular, while NP subjects require no subcategorization, exactly as in Chomsky (1965), subjects of special form (clausal subjects and null or "impersonal" subjects) require features like +S and +g} .…”

Section: (21)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Subcategorization and syntax-based theta-role assignment

Emonds

1991

Nat Lang Linguist Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Classic problems of how to generalize over predicate-argument relations (e.g., buy vs. sell; spray paint vs. spray a wall) have led to postulating semantic representations which are structured differently than deep syntax, such as (linked) theta grids and (lexical) conceptual structures. I argue that such autonomous semantics massively violates parsimony, and that theta-roles are better predicted by using only modestly enhanced, independently justified deep structures. In addition, I claim that several recent generalizations (of Rizzi, Levin and Rappaport, and Randall) are better formulated as deep syntactic properties than in terms of theta-roles.This syntactic approach to predicate-argument relations thus reinitiates a line of research implicit in Chomsky's Aspects but never developed. The first section argues that only this approach faithfully applies the syntactic revolution to lexical (headcomplement) semantics. Principles invoked include Chomsky's Full Interpretation and Rule for Agents and Talmy's Figure/Ground separation, along with a new Ground Specification and syntactic counterparts to two formal devices from Jackendoff's Conceptual Structures. The thematic role constellations for many verb classes (mostly but not all from English) are shown to follow from these principles. The conclusion speculates that the theta-roles assigned to a sentence are not its properties at a linguistic level, but rather indicate how that sentence is to modify cognitive representations.

show abstract

“…Emonds (2000, chapters 3-4) lays out and justifies the general architecture of this approach; further detailed empirical arguments for it appear in Emonds (1991;2006). 5 A category is "realized in a position" by being phonologically spelled out or by being licensed as empty by some principle of syntax, such as Binding Theory, conditions on ellipsis, etc.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%