A quantitative model of word order and movement in English, Dutch and German complement constructions Karin Harbusch Computer Science Dept., University of KoblenzLandau firstname.lastname@example.org & Gerard Kempen Psychology Dept., Leiden University & Max Planck Institute Nijmegen email@example.com Preview 1. 2. Introduction Essentials of Performance Grammar 3. 4. Hierarchical component Linearization component: topologies Topology sharing in the three target languages Linear order and typed feature unification Examples in the three target languages 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 betweenlanguage variations of these phenomena reduce to differences between a few numerical parameters. 2. Essentials of Performance Grammar Performance Grammar (PG) is a psycholinguistically 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 XP HeaD func pos XP lexical anchor Segments such as in clauses ... S S HD SUBJ v NP S S DOBJ IOBJ S S PRED S S S CMPR PRT CMP PINF … NP NP|PP NP| CP prep | S|PP PP adv ADJP | PP ... combine into lexical , e.g. clausal, HD frames v fool S SUBJ NP DOBJ MOD* NP ADVP|PP|S Example “Slim snijdertje fopte dertig zeerovers” “Clever tailor fooled thirty pirates” (Title of Dutch children’s story by Annie M.G. Schmidt) Lexical frames from the mental S lexicon SUBJ HD DOBJ MOD* NP v NP ADVP |PP|S NP NP fopte/fooled DET Q MOD* DP CNP ADJP|PP HD n snijdertje/tailor ADJP DET Q MOD* HD DP CNP ADJP|PP n zeerover/pirate CNP MOD* HD HD ADVP adj crd slim/clever dertig/thirty Substitution (feature structures are omitted) S DET Q SUBJ HD DOBJ NP v NP NP fopte/fooled NP MOD* DP CNP ADJP|PP ADJP HD DET Q MOD* n MOD* ADVP|PP|S hd DP CNP ADJP|PP n snijdertje/ zeerover/pirate CNP tailor MOD* HD HD ADVP adj crd slim/clever dertig/thirty Reduced dominance structure S HD SUBJ HD DOBJ HD v NP v NP v fopte/ fooled fopte/ fooled MOD HD ADJP n HD snijdertje/ tailor q HD CNP n HD zeerover/ pirate adj crd slim/ clever dertig/ thirty fopte/ fooled Linearization Component Data 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: Forefield English Dutch/German F1 F2 F1 F3 Midfield M1 M2 M3 Endfield M4 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 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 English clausal topology S SUBJ F1 F2 DOBJ HD F3 NP M1 v M2 M3 NP M4 fooled MOD HD Q HD ADJP n CNP n tailor pirate HD HD adj crd clever thirty E1 E2 Dutch clausal topology S SUBJ F1 NP DOBJ HD M1 v M2 M3 NP M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 fopte MOD HD Q HD ADJP n CNP n zeerover snijdertje HD HD adj crd slim dertig 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 shared area (LS) central non-shared area … HD … right-peripheral shared area (RS) Example S HD SUBJ CMP v NP S did John HD CMP v S try DOBJ PINF NP PP who to HD v call Example (cont.) HD F1 M1 v did S CMP SUBJ M2 NP E1 HD John M1 F1 v DOBJ try F1 S NP who CMP E1 PINF M1 PP to S HD M1 v call Example (cont.) HD F1 M1 v S CMP SUBJ M2 N P did DOBJJohn E1 HD M1 F1N P v try who F1 S CMP E1 S PINF M1 PP to HD M1 v call Example (cont.) DOBJ F1 N P Who HD M1 v did S CMP SUBJ M2 N P John E1 HD M1 F1 v try F1 S CMP E1 S PINF M1 PP to HD M1 v call Unsuccessful attempt at sharing Who did Poirot claim that he saw last week? *Who did Poirot make the claim that he saw last week? S DOBJ HD SUBJ CMP NP v NP S who did F1 Poirot HD DOBJ x v NP HD CMP DP n S the claim make DET F1 CMPR SUBJ HD MOD CP NP v NP that he saw last week Language-spec. values for LS/RS Clause type English Interrogative LS=0 RS=0 LS=1 RS=0 LS=3 RS=0 LS=3 RS=0 n.a. Declarative & Finite Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition Decl. & Non-Finite, Verb Raising Decl. & Non-Finite, Third Construction Dutch LS=0 RS=1 LS=1 RS=1 LS=1 RS=1 LS=4:6 RS=1 LS=1:6 RS=1 German LS=0 RS=1 LS=1 RS=1 LS=1 RS=1 LS=5 RS=1 LS=1:6 RS=1 Within-language parametrization: Slot assignment (Engl.) Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition F1 F2 F3 SUBJ M1 … M4 E1 E2 HD Parameters (cont.): English sharing left-peripheral shared area (LS) central non-shared area Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition F1 F2 F3 SUBJ M1 M2 … E2 HD RS Between-language parametrization left-peripheral shared area (LS) central non-shared area RS English Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition F1 F2 F3 SUBJ F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 Dutch/German Decl. & NonFinite, VP Extraposition M1 M2 … E2 HD verb in subclause M6 E1 E2 Comparison: Engl./Du./Ger. sharing left-peripheral shared area (LS) central non-shared area RS English Decl. & Non-Finite, VP Extraposition F1 F2 F3 F1 M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 Dutch/German Decl. & NonFinite, VP Extraposition M1 M2 … E2 M6 E1 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 HeaDv) as their value. Slots are initialized with the value empty list, denoted by "" (e.g., [ 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 [ F1 c=1] states that the list serving as F1's value should contain exactly one member. F1t F1t 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 [tpl 1 F1, ..., E2 2 ] S unifying the slots in the two laterally shared areas according to the LS and RS parameters. CMP The contents of non-shared (central) slots are appended to S 2 tpl 1 F1, ... the contents of the receiving slot ctype decl-fin (see 2 ). 3. English question formation Who do I have to call? F1 F2 F3 M1 do M3 M4 E1 E2 have Who M2 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 did M3 M4 E1 E2 say Who M2 you 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 saw I know saw F1 who F2JohnF3 I M1 know M2 M3 M4 E1 E2 who John saw 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). English question formation (cont.) a. Who did you claim that you saw last week? S DOBJ F1 NP who HD SUBJ CM P v NP S did you F1 HD CMP v S claim F1 CM PR SUBJ HD M OD CP NP v NP that you saw last week Island Effects in English a. Who did you claim that you saw last week? b.*Who did you make the claim that you saw last week? S DOBJ HD SUBJ CM P NP v NP S who did you HD DOBJ x v NP F1 make DET HD CMP DP n S the claim F1 CM PR SUBJ HD M OD CP NP v NP that you saw last week Dutch question formation Dutch interrogative main clauses feature Subject-Verb inversion without the equivalent of do-insertion: a. Zag je dat? saw you that ‘Did you see that?’ F1 M1 Zag M2 M3 M4 M5 je dat M6 E1 E2 M2 M3 M4 M5 dat M6 E1 E2 a´. Je zag dat? F1 Je M1 zag Dutch question formation (cont.) b. Wie zag dat? who saw that ‘Who saw that?’ F1 M1 Wie zag M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 M6 E1 E2 dat c. Wat zagen ze? ‘What did they see?’ F1 Wat M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 zagen ze Dutch question formation (cont.) Zij vroeg of ik Jan kende She asked whether I John knew ‘She asked whether I knew John’ F1 M1 Zij vroeg M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 of ik Jan kende Because the complement is interrogative here, the sharing rule prohibits left-peripheral sharing: LS=0. Clause Union in Dutch ... dat ik Jan zal bellen that I John will phone '... that I will phone John F1 M1 dat M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 ik zal Jan bellen 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. Clause Union in Dutch (cont.) ... dat ik Jan bellen zal that I John phone will '... that I will phone John' F1 M1 dat M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 ik zal Jan bellen Dutch Particle Hopping ... dat ik Jan zou hebben op gebeld that I John would have up called '... that I would have called John up' F1 M1 dat M2 M3 M4 M5 ik Jan op M6 zou E1 E2 hebben gebeld 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. Dutch Particle Hopping (cont.) ... dat ik Jan zou hebben op gebeld that I John would have up called '... that I would have called John up' F1 M1 dat M2 M3 M4 M5 ik Jan op Second level: LS=4:6, third level: LS=4 M6 zou E1 E2 hebben gebeld Dutch Particle Hopping (cont.) ... dat ik Jan zou op hebben gebeld that I John would up have called '... that I would have called John up' F1 M1 dat M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 ik zou hebben Jan op gebeld Second level: LS=4, third level: LS=4:6 Dutch Particle Hopping (cont.) ... dat ik Jan op zou hebben gebeld that I John up would have called '... that I would have called John up' F1 M1 dat M2 M3 M4 M5 ik Jan op Second level: LS=4:6, third level: LS=4:6 M6 zou E1 E2 hebben gebeld Dutch Cross-serial Dependency ... 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 dat M2 ik M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 wil Jan helpen de fiets maken 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. 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 dass M2 er uns es M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 zwingt zu tun Parametrization for German VP Extraposion verbs: shared areas: LS=1, RS=1 slot assignment for complement clause: E2 German Third Construction a. ... dass er uns verspricht es zu tun that he us (Dat.) promises it to do '... that he promises us to do it' F1 M1 dass M2 er es M3 uns M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspricht 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 F1 M1 dass M2 er M3 uns es M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspricht zu tun c. ... dass er es uns zu tun verspricht F1 M1 dass M2 er es M3 uns M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspricht zu tun Third Construction (cont.) d. ... dass er es uns verspricht zu tun F1 M1 dass M2 er es M3 uns M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspricht zu tun e. ? ... dass er uns es verspricht zu tun F1 M1 dass M2 er M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 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 Nominal Segments ... NP NP NP NP NP HD DET Q MOD CMP n|pro DP CNP ... form nominal lexical frames HD DET n DP pirate ADJP|PP|S NP Q CNP MOD* ADJP|PP|S PP|S Example S SUBJ HD CMP NP v know S HD SUBJ HD DOBJ pro NP v NP hates we Dana Kim Hierarchical structure Simplified lexical frames underlying the sentences We know Dana hates Kim and Kim we know Dana hates. Example (cont.) S SUBJ F1 F2 F3 NP CMP HD M1 v M2 M3 M4 E1 E2 S know pro F1 F2 F3 NP DOBJ HD SUBJ HD M1 v M2 M3 NP M4 E1 hates we Dana Kim Topology slot assignment The focused Direct OBJect Kim may go to M3, producing: We know Dana hates Kim E2 Example (cont.) S SUBJ F1 F2 F3 NP HD pro CMP HD M1 M2 v M3 know DOBJ F1 NP M4 E1 E2 HD SUBJ F2 F3 NP S M1 v M2 M3 M4 E1 hates we Kim Dana Topology slot assignment The Direct OBJect Kim may also go to F1 if the constituent is focused E2 Example (cont.) S DOBJ F1 NP SUBJ F2 F3 NP CMP HD M1 v M2 M3 M4 E1 E2 S know Kim F1 pro HD SUBJ HD F2 F3 NP M1 v hates we Dana Sharing produces: Kim we know Dana hates M2 M3 M4 E1 E2 Example (cont.) S SUBJ NP [tpl 2 ] HD pro HD ctype MainCl tpl 1 F1, F3 o 2 , M1 o 3 , B2 o 4 CMP v [lemma 3 ] S know SUBJ tpl 4 NP [tpl 5 ] we Dana 1 F1o 7 ,F3o 5 ,M1o 6 1 F1,F3o 5 ,M1o 6 ,M3o 7 HD DOBJ v NP hates [lemma 6 ] foc + tpl 7 Kim Topology slot assignment in terms of feature structures Both placement options of the focused direct object are specified in the disjunctive alternatives of the TPL feature of the complement S node (gray rectangle). Scrambling in German 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’ F1 M1 M2 dass niemand M3 d.Fahrr. M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspr. zu vers. zu rep. Scrambling in German (cont.) b. ... dass niemand das Fahrrad verspricht zu versuchen zu reparieren F1 M1 M2 dass niemand M3 d.Fahrr. M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspr. zu vers. zu rep. Scrambling in German (cont.) c. ?... dass das Fahrrad niemand verspricht zu versuchen zu reparieren F1 M1 M2 dass niem. d.Fahrr. M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 verspr. zu vers. zu rep. Right-peripheral sharing 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.’ F1 M1 wird M2 er M3 M4 M5 M6 E1 E2 haben ihr nicht verspr. d.Wag. zu wa.