Advertisement

A “Maximal Exclusion” Approach to Structural Underspecification in Dynamic Syntax

  • Tohru SerakuEmail author
Article

Abstract

‘Case’ and ‘grammatical relations’ are central to syntactic theory, but rigorous treatments of these concepts in surface-oriented grammars such as Dynamic Syntax are pending. In this respect, Japanese is worthy of mention; in this language, the nominative case particle ga, which typically marks a subject, may mark an object in certain syntactic contexts, and more than one instance of ga may be present within a single clause. These patterns cannot be captured if we simply assume that ga marks a subject. In the present article, we aim to advance formal aspects of the framework, especially the mechanism of ‘structural underspecification,’ by proposing that the parse of a case particle maximally excludes potential landing sites of an unfixed node at the time of parsing the case particle, delaying the resolution of the unfixed node until a subsequent stage of structure building. This maximal exclusion approach to structural underspecification accounts for a range of case marking patterns and their connections with grammatical relations.

Keywords

Case Grammatical relation Parsing Incrementality Japanese 

Notes

Acknowledgements

My sincere gratitude goes to Ruth Kempson, who provided me with constructive and stimulating comments on an earlier version of this article. I appreciate the anonymous reviewers for their valuable questions and suggestions.

References

  1. Aikhenvald, A., Dixon, R., & Ohnishi, M. (Eds.). (2001). Non-canonical marking of subjects and objects. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  2. Blackburn, P., & Meyer-Viol, W. (1994). Linguistics, logic and finite trees. Logic Journal of the IGPL,2, 3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cann, R. (2011). Towards an account of the auxiliary system in English. In R. Kempson, et al. (Eds.), The dynamics of lexical interfaces (pp. 279–317). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Cann, R., Kempson, R., & Marten, L. (2005). The dynamics of language. Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  5. Chomsky, N. (1995). Minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dalrymple, M. (2001). Lexical functional grammar. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Harada, S.-I. (1973). Counter equi-NP deletion. Annual Bulletin Research Institute of Logopaedics and Phoniatrics,7, 113–148.Google Scholar
  8. Kempson, R., Cann, R., & Otsuka, M. (2002). On left and right dislocation. Edinburgh: Ms., University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  9. Kempson, R., Gregoromichelaki, E., & Howes, C. (Eds.). (2011). The dynamics of lexical interfaces. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  10. Kempson, R., & Kiaer, J. (2010). Multiple long-distance scrambling. Journal of Linguistics,46, 127–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W., & Gabbay, D. (2001). Dynamic syntax. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  12. Kiaer, J. (2014). Pragmatic syntax. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Kishimoto, H. (2004). Transitivity of ergative-marking predicates in Japanese. Studies in Language,28, 105–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kishimoto, H. (2017). Case marking. In M. Shibatani, et al. (Eds.), The handbook of Japanese syntax (pp. 447–495). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  15. Koizumi, M. (2008). Nominative object. In S. Miyagawa & M. Saito (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Japanese linguistics (pp. 141–164). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kuno, S. (1973). The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  17. Kuno, S. (1976). Subject raising. In M. Shibatani (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 5, pp. 17–41). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Kuno, S. (1987). Danwa-no bunpou. (Grammar of discourse). Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  19. Kuroda, S.-Y. (1992). What can Japanese say about government and binding? In S.-Y. Kuroda (Ed.), Japanese syntax and semantics (pp. 40–52). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nakamura, H., Yoshimoto, K., Mori, Y., & Kobayashi, M. (2009). Multiple subject construction in Japanese. In H. Hattori, et al. (Eds.), New frontiers in artificial intelligence (Vol. 5447, pp. 103–118). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nambu, S., Hwang, H.-K., Oshima, D., & Nomura, M. (2018). The nominative/accusative alternation in Japanese and information structure. Journal of East Asian Linguistics,27, 141–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. NKK (Nihongo Kijutsubunpou Kenkyuukai). (2009). Gendai nihongo bunpou. (The grammar of modern Japanese) (Vol. 2). Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.Google Scholar
  23. Noda, T. (1996). “Wa” to “ga”. (“Wa” and “ga”). Tokyo: Kuroshio Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Purver, M., Gregoromichelaki, E., Meyer-Viol, W., & Cann, R. (2010). Splitting the ‘I’s and crossing the ‘you’s. In P. Łupkowski & M. Purver (Eds.), Aspects of semantics and pragmatics of dialogue (pp. 43–50). Poznań: Polish Society for Cognitive Science.Google Scholar
  25. Seraku, T. (2013). Clefts, relatives, and language dynamics. Ph.D. diss., the University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  26. Seraku, T. (2016). A “maximal exclusion” approach to structural uncertainty in dynamic syntax. In Proceedings of the 30th Pacific Asia conference on language, information, and computation (pp. 39–47).Google Scholar
  27. Seraku, T., & Ohtani, A. (2016). Wh-licensing in Japanese right dislocations. In C. Piñón (Ed.), Empirical issues in syntax and semantics (Vol. 11, pp. 124–132). Paris: CSSP.Google Scholar
  28. Shibatani, M. (1977). Grammatical relations and surface cases. Language,53, 789–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Shibatani, M. (1978). Nihongo-no bunseki. (The analysis of Japanese). Tokyo: Taishukan Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  30. Tada, H. (1992). Nominative objects in Japanese. Journal of Japanese Linguistics,14, 91–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Takano, Y. (2003). Nominative objects in Japanese complex predicate constructions. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory,21, 779–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hankuk University of Foreign StudiesYonginKorea

Personalised recommendations