A quantitative model of word order and movement in English, Dutch and German complement constructions Karin Harbusch & Gerard Kempen Computer Science Psychology.

A quantitative model of word order and movement in English, Dutch and German complement constructions

Karin Harbusch & Gerard Kempen

Computer Science Psychology Dept.,

Dept., University Leiden University

of Koblenz- & Max Planck

Landau Institute Nijmegen

[email protected] [email protected]

Preview

1. Introduction2. Essentials of Performance Grammar

Hierarchical component Linearization component: topologies Topology sharing in the three target languages Linear order and typed feature unification

3. Examples in the three target languages4. Conclusions

1. Introduction

Linear order in English, Dutch and German complement constructions varies considerably w.r.t.: Wh-extraction, clause union, extraposition, verb clustering, particle movement, etc.

We show that both the within- and between-language variations of these phenomena reduce to differences between a few numerical parameters.

2. Essentials of Performance Grammar

Performance Grammar (PG) is a psycho-linguistically motivated formalism. Psycholinguistic phenomena suggest separate hierarchical and linear grammar components.

We focus on the linear component and describe it in declarative terms based on feature unification.

The parametrization scheme we propose belongs to the linear component.

Hierarchical component of PG

Data structures Segments XP

HeaD

pos

lexical anchor

XP

func

XP

S

HD

v

S

SUBJ

NP

S

DOBJ

NP

S

IOBJ

NP|PP

S

PRED

NP|ADJP

HD

v

SUBJ

NP

S

DOBJ

NP

MOD*

ADVP|PP | S

Segments such as in clauses ...

fool

S

CMPR

CP

S

PRT

prep|adv

S

CMP

S|PP| PP

S

PINF

PP

…

... combine intolexical , e.g. clausal, frames

Example

“Slim snijdertje fopte dertig zeerovers”

“Clever tailor fooled thirty pirates”

(Title of Dutch children’s story by Annie M.G. Schmidt)

HD

crd

dertig/thirty

ADJP

MOD*

ADVP

HD

adj

slim/clever

NP

DET

DP

Q MOD*

ADJP|PP

HD

n

snijdertje/tailor

NP

DET

DP

Q MOD*

ADJP|PP

HD

n

zeerover/pirate

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

fopte/fooled

DOBJ

NP

MOD*

ADVP |PP|S

CNP

CNP

CNP

Lexical frames from the mental lexicon

HD

crd

dertig/thirty

ADJP

MOD*

ADVP

HD

adj

slim/clever

NP

DET

DP

Q MOD*

ADJP|PP

HD

n

snijdertje/tailor

NP

DET

DP

Q MOD*

ADJP|PP

hd

n

zeerover/pirate

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

fopte/fooled

DOBJ

NP

MOD*

ADVP|PP|S

CNP CNP

CNP

Substitution (feature structures are omitted)

HD

crd

dertig/thirty

ADJP

HD

adj

slim/clever

MOD HD

n

snijdertje/tailor

q HD

n

zeerover/pirate

S

SUBJ

NP

DOBJ

NP

HD

v

fopte/fooled

CNP

Reduced dominance structure

HD

v

fopte/fooled

HD

v

fopte/fooled

Forefield Midfield Endfield

Linearization ComponentData structure: topology

A topology is associated with the foot node layer of every lexical frame

Function: reservation of work/storage space for frame constituents

Topologies with nine slots for clauses:

English

Dutch/German

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

Assigning slot positions (English)

Slot Filler

F1 Declarative main clause: Topic, Focus (one constituent only) Interrogative main clause: Wh-constituent Complement clause: Wh-constituent

F2 Complement clause: CoMPLementizeR that

F3 Subject (iff non-Wh)

M1 Pre-INFinitive to < HeaD verb (oblig.) < PaRTicle

M2 Direct Object (iff personal pronoun) Interrogative main cl.: Subject (iff non-Wh); SUBJ < DOBJ

M3 Indirect OBJect < Direct OBJect (non-Wh)

M4 PaRTicle

E1 Non-finite Complement of 'Verb Raiser‘ (in particular Auxiliaries)

E2 Non-finite Complement of 'VP Extraposition verb‘ Finite Complement clause

Slot positions for Dutch & German Slot Filler

F1 Declarative main cl.: SUBJect, Topic or Focus (one constituent only) Interrogative main clause: Wh-constituent Complement clause: Wh-constituent

M1 Main clause: HeaD verb Complement clause: CoMPLementizer dat/om (Du.), dass (Ger.)

M2 Subject NP (iff non-Wh), Direct OBJect (iff personal pronoun)

M3 Direct OBJect < Indirect OBJect (iff non-Wh)

M4 PaRTicle (Du. only)

M5 Non-finite CoMPlement of Verb Raiser

M6 Subordinate clause: Du.: Pre-INFinitive te < HeaD verb Ger.: PaRTicle < Pre-INFinitive zu < HeaD verb

E1 Non-finite Complement of 'Verb Raiser‘ (Du. only)

E2 Non-finite Complement of 'VP Extraposition verb‘

Finite Complement clause

HD

crd

thirty

ADJP

HD

adj

clever

MOD HD

n

tailor

Q HD

n

pirate

S

SUBJ HD DOBJ

CNP

English clausal topology

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2v

fooled

NP NP

HD

crd

dertig

ADJP

HD

adj

slim

MOD HD

n

snijdertje

Q HD

n

zeerover

S

SUBJ HD DOBJ

CNP

Dutch clausal topology

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2v

fopte

NP NP

Topology sharing

If a sentence consists of a main clause plus one or more complement clauses, each of the clauses (i.e. verb frames) instantiates its own topology. In such cases, topologies are allowed to share slots, conditionally upon several restrictions.

After two slots have been shared, they are no longer distinguishable; in fact, they are the same object.

This operation may cause upward movement of constituents: "promotion".

General constraints on topology sharing: Only between adjacent clausal topologies

Only between identically labeled slots

HeaD slot never participate in sharing

Only left- and/or right-peripheral

left-peripheral central non-shared right-peripheral shared area (LS) area shared area (RS)

… HD …

S

HD

v

did

CMP

S

SUBJ

NP

John HD

v

try

CMP

S

DOBJ

NP

who

PINF

PP

to

HD

v

call

Example

S

HD

v

did

CMP

S

SUBJ

NP

John HD

v

try

CMP

S

DOBJ

NP

who

PINF

PP

to

HD

v

call

F1 M1 M2 E1

E1M1

M1 M1

Example (cont.)

F1

F1

S

HD

v

did

CMP

S

SUBJ

NP

John HD

v

try

CMP

S

PINF

PP

to

HD

v

call

F1 M1 M2 E1

E1M1

M1 M1

Example (cont.)

F1

DOBJ

NP

who

F1

S

HD

v

did

CMP

S

SUBJ

NP

John HD

v

try

CMP

S

DOBJ

NP

Who

PINF

PP

to

HD

v

call

F1 M1 M2 E1

E1M1

M1 M1

Example (cont.)

F1

F1

S

HD

v

did

SUBJ

NP

Poirot

CMP

S

HD

v

make

DOBJ

NP

DET

DP

the

HD

n

claim

CMP

S

DOBJ

NP

who

CMPR

CP

that

SUBJ

NP

he

HD

v

saw

MOD

NP

last week

Who did Poirot claim that he saw last week? *Who did Poirot make the claim that he saw last week?

Unsuccessful attempt at sharing

x

F1

F1

Language-spec. values for LS/RSClause type English Dutch German

Interrogative LS=0 RS=0

LS=0 RS=1

LS=0 RS=1

Declarative & Finite LS=1 RS=0

LS=1 RS=1

LS=1 RS=1

Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition

LS=3 RS=0

LS=1 RS=1

LS=1 RS=1

Decl. & Non-Finite, Verb Raising

LS=3 RS=0

LS=4:6 RS=1

LS=5 RS=1

Decl. & Non-Finite, Third Construction

n.a. LS=1:6 RS=1

LS=1:6 RS=1

Within-language parametrization: Slot assignment (Engl.)

M1 … M4 E1 E2F1 F2 F3

HD

Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition

SUBJ

Parameters (cont.): English sharing left-peripheral central non-shared RS shared area (LS) area

M1 M2 … E2F1 F2 F3

Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition

HD SUBJ

Between-language parametrization left-peripheral central non-shared RS shared area (LS) area

M1 M2 … E2F1 F2 F3

HD verb in subclause

M6 E1F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5

English Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition

Dutch/German Decl. & Non- Finite, VP Extraposition

SUBJ

E2

Comparison: Engl./Du./Ger. sharing left-peripheral central non-shared RS shared area (LS) area

M1 M2 … E2F1 F2 F3

M6 E1

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5

English Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition

Dutch/German Decl. & Non- Finite, VP Extraposition

E2

Specification of topologies in terms of typed feature unification

S [tpl p(1)t, p(2)t, ... p(9)t] where p(i)t denotes the type of the ith member of the list. For each of the target languages 9 slot types are defined (e.g., F1t). Slots are attributes that take a non-branching list of lemmas or constituents (e.g. SUBJect-NP, CoMPlement-S or HeaD-v) as their value.

Slots are initialized with the value empty list, denoted by "" (e.g., [F1t F1 ]. Lists of segments can be combined by the append operation, represented by the symbol ”O". A slot type may impose a constraint on the cardinality (the number of members) of the list serving as its value. Cardinality constraints are expressed as subscripts of the value list. E.g., the subscript "c=1" in [F1t F1 c=1] states that the list serving as F1's value should contain exactly one member.

Specification of topologies (cont.) Depending on the values of sharing parameters LS and RS,

the list is divided into a left area, the central area, and the right area. LS and RS are set to zero by default; this applies to the root S of main clauses and adverbial subordinate clauses. The root S of a complement clause obtains its sharing parameter values from the foot of the S-CMP-S segment belonging to the lexical frame of its governing verb.

Sharing (see 1 ) simply means unifying the slots in the two laterally shared areas according to the LS and RS parameters.

The contents of non-shared (central) slots are appended to the contents of the receiving slot

(see 2 ).

S

CMP

S

[tpl 1 F1, ..., E2 2 ]

2 tpl 1 F1, ... ctype decl-fin

3. English question formationWho do I have to call?

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

do

have

Who to call

The non-finite complements of both do and have are declarative. (Cf. the paraphrase "For which person x is it the case that I have to call x", which highlights the scope of who.) It follows that LS=3 in both complements. Do is a Verb Raiser, have (in have to) is a VP Extraposition verb.

English question formation (cont.)Who did you say John saw?

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

did you

say

Who John saw

The lower clause is finite and declarative (LS = 1) — cf. the paraphrase “For which person x is it the case that you said that John saw x”. (The scope of who exceeds its ‘own’ clause and includes the matrix clause.) LS = 3 in the middle topology.

English question formation (cont.)

I know who John sawF1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

I know

Here, the scope of the interrogative pronoun does not include the main clause (“I know for which person x it is the case that John saw x”). Therefore, the complement is interrogative and does not share its F1 slot with that of the main clause (LS = 0).

who John saw

I know who John saw

a. Who did you claim that you saw last week?

English question formation (cont.)

S

HD

v

did

SUBJ

NP

you

CMP

S

HD

v

claim

CMP

DOBJ

NP

who

CMPR

CP

that

SUBJ

NP

you

HD

v

saw

MOD

NP

last week

S

F1

F1

F1

a. Who did you claim that you saw last week?

b.*Who did you make the claim that you saw last week?

Island Effects in English

S

HD

v

did

SUBJ

NP

you

CMP

S

HD

v

make

DOBJ

NP

DET

DP

the

HD

n

claim

CMP

S

DOBJ

NP

who

CMPR

CP

that

SUBJ

NP

you

HD

v

saw

MOD

NP

last week

x

F1

F1

a. Zag je dat? saw you that ‘Did you see that?’

Dutch question formation

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

Zag je dat

Dutch interrogative main clauses feature Subject-Verb inversion without the equivalent of do-insertion:

a´. Je zag dat?

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

Je zag dat

b. Wie zag dat? who saw that ‘Who saw that?’

c. Wat zagen ze? ‘What did they see?’

Dutch question formation (cont.)

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

Wat zagen ze

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

Wie zag dat

Dutch question formation (cont.)

Zij vroeg of ik Jan kende She asked whether I John knew‘She asked whether I knew John’

of ik Jan kende

Because the complement is interrogative here, the sharing rule prohibits left-peripheral sharing: LS=0.

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

Zij vroeg

... dat ik Jan zal bellen that I John will phone'... that I will phone John

The subordinate clause features clause union, causing the auxiliary zal to intervene between the Direct OBJect Jan and its governor bellen. The left-peripheral sharing area may vary between 4 and 6 slots (LS=4:6). Because Jan lands in M3, i.e. in the shared area, it is promoted. The remainder of the lower topology, including the HeaD bellen itself, occupies E1 — one of the options of the complement of a Verb Raiser.

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dat ik zal

Jan bellen

Clause Union in Dutch

... dat ik Jan bellen zal that I John phone will '... that I will phone John'

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dat ik zal

Jan bellen

Clause Union in Dutch (cont.)

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dat ik zou

The positions marked by "" are grammatical alternatives to the particle (op) position mentioned in the example; no other positions are allowed. Given LS=4:6 for complements of Verb Raisers, it follows that Jan is obligatorily promoted into the higher topology. However, sharing of the fifth slot (M4) is optional.

... dat ik Jan zou hebben op gebeld that I John would have up called'... that I would have called John up'

hebben

Jan op gebeld

Dutch Particle Hopping

... dat ik Jan zou hebben op gebeld that I John would have up called'... that I would have called John up'

Jan op gebeld

Dutch Particle Hopping (cont.)

E2M5M3

zouikdat

E1M6M4M2M1F1

hebben

Second level: LS=4:6, third level: LS=4

... dat ik Jan zou op hebben gebeld that I John would up have called'... that I would have called John up'

hebben

Jan gebeldop

Dutch Particle Hopping (cont.)

E2M5M3

zouikdat

E1M6M4M2M1F1

Second level: LS=4, third level: LS=4:6

... dat ik Jan op zou hebben gebeld that I John up would have called'... that I would have called John up'

E2M5M3

zouikdat

E1M6M4M2M1F1

hebben

Jan gebeldop

Dutch Particle Hopping (cont.)

Second level: LS=4:6, third level: LS=4:6

Assumption about the order of constituents that land in the same slot but originate from different levels in the clause hierarchy: We stipulate that constituents from more deeply embedded clauses follow constituents belonging to higher clauses.

... dat ik Jan de fiets wil helpen maken that I John the bike want-to help repair'... that I want to help John to repair the bike'

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dat ik wil

Jan helpen

de fiets maken

Dutch Cross-serial Dependency

German VP Extraction... dass er uns zwingt es zu tun that he us (Akk.) forces it to do'... that he forces us to do it'

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dass er uns zwingt

es zu tun

Parametrization for German VP Extraposion verbs: shared areas: LS=1, RS=1 slot assignment for complement clause: E2

German Third Constructiona. ... dass er uns verspricht es zu tun that he us (Dat.) promises it to do '... that he promises us to do it'

uns

E2M5M3

versprichterdass

E1M6M4M2M1F1

es zu tun

Parametrization for German Third Construction verbs: shared areas: LS=1:6, RS=1 slot assignment for complement clause: M5 or E2

German Third Construction (cont.)b. ... dass er uns es zu tun verspricht

c. ... dass er es uns zu tun verspricht

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dass er uns verspricht

es zu tun

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dass er uns verspricht

es zu tun

Third Construction (cont.)d. ... dass er es uns verspricht zu tun

e. ? ... dass er uns es verspricht zu tun

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dass er uns verspricht

es zu tun

F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2

dass er uns verspricht

es zu tun

4. Conclusions We have shown that the introduction of topologies with a

fixed number of slots, in conjunction with cross-clause lateral topology sharing enables a simple treatment of word order and movement (promotion) in complement structures of the three target languages. The great amount of within- and between-language variation typical of these constructions could be analyzed as resulting from different settings of a small number of quantitative parameters (size of shared areas; slot number of landing site targeted by the complement clause, by head verb, and by other major constituents).

Due to space limitations we could not go into much detail. Elsewhere we have provided a more fine-grained discussion of our approach and its psycholinguistic motivation. Future study is needed to find out whether the PG approach generalizes to other languages.

Thank you!

Sources of the examples: Haegeman, 1994 Kathol, 2000 Rambow,1994 Sag & Wasow, 1999

For more PG details see

http://www.uni-koblenz.de/~harbusch/pg.html

NP

HD

n|pro

NP

DET

DP

NP

Q

CNP

NP

MOD

ADJP|PP|S

NP

CMP

PP|S

HD

n

DET

DP

NP

Q

CNP

MOD*

ADJP|PP | S

Nominal Segments ...

pirate

... form nominal lexical frames

Example

Hierarchical structure

Simplified lexical frames underlying the sentences We know Dana hates Kim and Kim we know Dana hates.

HD

pro

we

SUBJ HD

v

DOBJ

NP

Dana

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

know

CMP

S

NP

Kim

hates

Example (cont.)

Topology slot assignment

The focused Direct OBJect Kim may go to M3, producing:

We know Dana hates Kim

HD

pro

we

SUBJ HD

v

DOBJ

NP

Dana

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

know

CMP

S

NP

Kim

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

hates

Example (cont.)

Topology slot assignment

The Direct OBJect Kim may also go to F1 if the constituent is focused

HD

pro

we

SUBJ HD

v

DOBJ

NP

Dana

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

know

CMP

S

NP

Kim

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

hates

Example (cont.)

Sharing produces:Kim we know Dana hates

HD

pro

we

SUBJ HD

v

DOBJ

NP

Dana

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

know

CMP

S

NP

Kim

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

F1 F2 F3 M1 M2 M3 M4 E1 E2

hates

ctype MainCl

tpl 1 F1, F3 o 2 , M1 o 3 , B2 o 4

1 F1,F3o 5 ,M1o 6 ,M3o 7

Example (cont.)

Topology slot assignment in terms of feature structuresBoth placement options of the focused direct object are

specified in the disjunctive alternatives of the TPL feature of the complement S node (gray rectangle).

HD

pro

we

SUBJ HD

v

DOBJ

NP

Dana

S

SUBJ

NP

HD

v

know

CMP

S

NP

Kim

hates

[tpl 2 ] [lemma 3 ] 1 F1o 7 ,F3o 5 ,M1o 6

[tpl 5 ]

[lemma 6 ]

foc +tpl 7

tpl 4

a. ... dass niemand verspricht zu versuchen das Fahrrad zu reparieren

… that nobody promises to try the

bike to repair

‘… that nobody promises to try to repair the bike’

Scrambling in German

E2M5M3

verspr.niemand

E1M6M4M2M1F1

zu vers.

d.Fahrr. zu rep.

dass

b. ... dass niemand das Fahrrad verspricht zu versuchen zu reparieren

Scrambling in German (cont.)

E2M5M3

verspr.niemand

E1M6M4M2M1F1

zu vers.

d.Fahrr. zu rep.

dass

c. ?... dass das Fahrrad niemand verspricht zu versuchen zu reparieren

Scrambling in German (cont.)

E2M5M3

verspr. niem.

E1M6M4M2M1F1

zu vers.

zu rep.

dass

d.Fahrr.

Versprochen wird er ihr nicht haben den Wagen zu waschen

promised will he her not have the car to wash

‘He will not have promised her to wash the car.’

Right-peripheral sharing

E2M5M3 E1M6M4M2M1F1

haben

verspr.

wird

zu wa.

er

ihr nicht

d.Wag.