Week 1b. Morphosyntactic features ch CAS LX 522 Syntax I

The atoms of the system Syntax tells us which arrangements of words make good sentences. But yet the words themselves don’t seem to matter, they aren’t the basic elements of the system. Syntax tells us which arrangements of words make good sentences. But yet the words themselves don’t seem to matter, they aren’t the basic elements of the system. Rather, it is the set of properties each word has that seem to be basic. Verb or not a verb, plural or not plural… Rather, it is the set of properties each word has that seem to be basic. Verb or not a verb, plural or not plural… *enthusiastic are students the the students are enthusiastic *the student are enthusiastic the student is enthusiastic the students are enthusiastic *the students is enthusiastic this coffee is/*are hot. these muffins are/*is tasty.

Properties… features… Words have properties. Words have properties. There is an abstract concept of plural, that is morphologically realized in several different ways. There is an abstract concept of plural, that is morphologically realized in several different ways. A deer ate my bagel. Deer are funny. A deer ate my bagel. Deer are funny. A dog ate my bagel. Dogs are funny. A dog ate my bagel. Dogs are funny. A goose ate my bagel. Geese are funny. A goose ate my bagel. Geese are funny. Same “agreement” requirement, regardless of the actual morphological shape. Same “agreement” requirement, regardless of the actual morphological shape. The abstract property of “plural” (or “singular”) seems to be what the grammar is sensitive to. The abstract property of “plural” (or “singular”) seems to be what the grammar is sensitive to. (Morphosyntactic) features. (Morphosyntactic) features.

Agreement In English, the subject and the verb of a sentence need to agree in number and (for be) person. In English, the subject and the verb of a sentence need to agree in number and (for be) person. The dog wants food. The dogs want food. The dog wants food. The dogs want food. The dog is hungry. The dogs are hungry. The dog is hungry. The dogs are hungry. I am hungry. We are hungry. I am hungry. We are hungry. If the subject is plural (has a plural feature) then the verb must take on a “plural” form. If the subject is plural (has a plural feature) then the verb must take on a “plural” form. Crosslinguistically common to have this kind of agreement relation between subject and verb. Crosslinguistically common to have this kind of agreement relation between subject and verb. The plural feature is interpretable on the subject, contributes to the meaning. On the verb, the (agreeing) plural feature is uninterpretable—more on that later. The plural feature is interpretable on the subject, contributes to the meaning. On the verb, the (agreeing) plural feature is uninterpretable—more on that later.

Data from other languages Il a dit qu’ elle était malade he[3.sg] have[3.sg] said that she was ill ‘He said that she was ill.’ Il a dit qu’ elle était malade he[3.sg] have[3.sg] said that she was ill ‘He said that she was ill.’ Ils ont dit qu’ elle était malade they[3.pl] have[3.pl] said that she was ill ‘They said that she was ill.’ Ils ont dit qu’ elle était malade they[3.pl] have[3.pl] said that she was ill ‘They said that she was ill.’ Standard 3-line format for examples from other languages (example, gloss, translation). Standard 3-line format for examples from other languages (example, gloss, translation). Why does it matter what other languages do? Why does it matter what other languages do?

What are the features? Some features matter for syntax, some don’t. Some features matter for syntax, some don’t. No language says that subject and verb must agree in the feature [invented in early September], although there are things that have this property. No language says that subject and verb must agree in the feature [invented in early September], although there are things that have this property. For the purpose of describing the grammar and explaining syntactic principles, we don’t care about [invented in early September]. For the purpose of describing the grammar and explaining syntactic principles, we don’t care about [invented in early September]. We have evidence, however, that [plural] matters to syntax. We have evidence, however, that [plural] matters to syntax. We’re looking for the minimal (least complicated) set of features that suffices to explain the grammar. We’re looking for the minimal (least complicated) set of features that suffices to explain the grammar.

[plural] We know number matters. In English, things can be singular or plural. So, a first guess is that nouns have either a [singular] feature or a [plural] feature. We know number matters. In English, things can be singular or plural. So, a first guess is that nouns have either a [singular] feature or a [plural] feature. Hypothesis: [sg] and [pl] are features a word can have. Hypothesis: [sg] and [pl] are features a word can have. Prediction: Four classes of words: [sg], [pl], [sg.pl], []. Prediction: Four classes of words: [sg], [pl], [sg.pl], []. But we really only have two classes in English. But we really only have two classes in English. This hypothesis overgenerates—it predicts the existence of the actual distinctions, but it also predicts other distinctions that don’t exist. This hypothesis overgenerates—it predicts the existence of the actual distinctions, but it also predicts other distinctions that don’t exist.

[plural] We observed the data (nouns can be singular or plural in English), we stated a hypothesis, which made predictions. We check the predictions… and it doesn’t seem right. The scientific method. We observed the data (nouns can be singular or plural in English), we stated a hypothesis, which made predictions. We check the predictions… and it doesn’t seem right. The scientific method. There is a simpler story we can tell, one that predicts exactly two classes. There is a simpler story we can tell, one that predicts exactly two classes. [plural] for plurals, [] for singulars. [plural] for plurals, [] for singulars.

Overgeneration / undergeneration Already we have the basic structure of our theory and a means of analysis evaluation. Already we have the basic structure of our theory and a means of analysis evaluation. Two independent features [pl] and [sg] predict four combinations, overgenerates. Two independent features [pl] and [sg] predict four combinations, overgenerates. All attested combinations are predicted. All attested combinations are predicted. Some predicted combinations are not attested. Some predicted combinations are not attested. An analysis that says “All words are singular” undergenerates. An analysis that says “All words are singular” undergenerates. All predicted combinations are attested. All predicted combinations are attested. Some attested combinations are not predicted. Some attested combinations are not predicted.

What kind of thing is a feature? Although features are “properties,” there are several views that have been taken on features. Although features are “properties,” there are several views that have been taken on features. If we view a feature like [plural] as being either there or not, it is a privative feature. If we view a feature like [plural] as being either there or not, it is a privative feature. We might also view a feature like [plural] as having one of two values: [+plural] for plurals, [-plural] for singulars. This is a binary valued feature. We might also view a feature like [plural] as having one of two values: [+plural] for plurals, [-plural] for singulars. This is a binary valued feature. We don’t know from the outset which view is the best for describing syntax, we want to choose the one that captures the generalizations we see. We don’t know from the outset which view is the best for describing syntax, we want to choose the one that captures the generalizations we see.

Duals For English, either a privative [plural] feature or a binary-valued [±plural] feature would work. In English there are two classes for number, singular and plural. For English, either a privative [plural] feature or a binary-valued [±plural] feature would work. In English there are two classes for number, singular and plural. Some languages also have a dual, a number reserved for pairs. Classical Arabic, for example, and Hopi. Some languages also have a dual, a number reserved for pairs. Classical Arabic, for example, and Hopi.

Hopi morphology Pam taaqa wari that man ran[sg] ‘That man ran.’ Pam taaqa wari that man ran[sg] ‘That man ran.’ Puma ta?taq-t yu?ti those man[pl] ran[pl] ‘Those men ran.’ Puma ta?taq-t yu?ti those man[pl] ran[pl] ‘Those men ran.’ Puma ta?taq-t wari those man[pl] ran[sg] ‘Those two men ran.’ Puma ta?taq-t wari those man[pl] ran[sg] ‘Those two men ran.’ In Hopi, the dual is expressed by combining singular and plural. If we analyzed dual as [+pl, +sg] (or as [pl, sg]), we have a kind of explanation for that.

The fourth number? Three numbers are attested in the world’s languages: singular, plural, and dual. Three numbers are attested in the world’s languages: singular, plural, and dual. We can handle this by going back to the view that [sg] and [pl] are independent. We can handle this by going back to the view that [sg] and [pl] are independent. Singular:[sg] Singular:[sg] Plural:[pl] Plural:[pl] Dual:[sg, pl] Dual:[sg, pl] The fourth possibility should be neither. But there doesn’t seem to be a fourth number. Hypothesis: General constraint on grammars: Nouns must have some number feature, [sg] is the default, added in if there is no number feature already. (We’ll return to this)

Words and language Let’s take a moment to lay out the general structure of this theory. Let’s take a moment to lay out the general structure of this theory. Knowing a language is Knowing a language is knowing the “words” knowing the “words” knowing how to put them together knowing how to put them together knowing how to pronounce them knowing how to pronounce them knowing what they mean in combination. knowing what they mean in combination.

The lexicon To construct a sentence, we start with the “words” and put them together. To construct a sentence, we start with the “words” and put them together. We can describe the knowledge of the words of a language as being a list, a mental lexicon. We can describe the knowledge of the words of a language as being a list, a mental lexicon.

Interfaces We can view a “word” as a bundle of features, as defined by its properties. The grammar assembles words into sentences. The sentence is interpreted and pronounced. We can view a “word” as a bundle of features, as defined by its properties. The grammar assembles words into sentences. The sentence is interpreted and pronounced. The assembly process is the grammar proper. The assembly process is the grammar proper. The system that interprets sentences is another cognitive module concerned with meaning, reasoning, etc. It interprets the constructed sentence at the interface. The system that interprets sentences is another cognitive module concerned with meaning, reasoning, etc. It interprets the constructed sentence at the interface. The system that determines the pronunciation of sentences is yet another cognitive module, interpreting the constructed sentence at its interface. The system that determines the pronunciation of sentences is yet another cognitive module, interpreting the constructed sentence at its interface. Lexicon Grammar A-P system C-I system this is essentially the picture on p. 146 of the textbook

Tension For English, it seems that independent [sg] and [pl] features is more complicated than we need, it seems to overgenerate. For English, it seems that independent [sg] and [pl] features is more complicated than we need, it seems to overgenerate. In the broader picture, Language needs to allow for independent [sg] and [pl] features in order to accommodate duals in, e.g., Hopi. In the broader picture, Language needs to allow for independent [sg] and [pl] features in order to accommodate duals in, e.g., Hopi. Since we’re striving to explain the grammatical system underlying all languages, we need a hypothesis about what is different in languages with no dual (e.g., English). One possibility: The feature [sg] is not recorded in the English lexicon. Book [], books [pl]. All languages have singulars, but in languages without duals, singular is the default, the “number for nouns not specified for number.” So languages can differ in whether they record [sg] in the lexicon.

What are the features? Hard to say. A universal set, some used in some languages, but not others? Learned? Hard to say. A universal set, some used in some languages, but not others? Learned? Some features seem not to exist, why? Some features seem not to exist, why? Ockham’s razor again—we want to define the simplest set of features we can to explain the data. Ockham’s razor again—we want to define the simplest set of features we can to explain the data.

Category The study of syntax is concerned with distribution. The study of syntax is concerned with distribution. Words seem to come in distributional classes. Words seem to come in distributional classes. For example, one class of words can appear after the possessive pronoun my (my book, *my at, *my quickly, *my explode, *my purple). The nouns. One class of words is compatible with past tense. The verbs. One class of words is compatible with comparative (happier). The adjectives. For example, one class of words can appear after the possessive pronoun my (my book, *my at, *my quickly, *my explode, *my purple). The nouns. One class of words is compatible with past tense. The verbs. One class of words is compatible with comparative (happier). The adjectives. Words can be separated into classes: noun, verb, adjective, preposition, etc. Words can be separated into classes: noun, verb, adjective, preposition, etc. Classes also vary with respect to the kind of morphological endings they can have, and so forth. (Arrival, replacement, destruction; widen, computerize) Classes also vary with respect to the kind of morphological endings they can have, and so forth. (Arrival, replacement, destruction; widen, computerize)

Distribution examples They have no noun. They have no noun. They can verb. They can verb. They are adjective. They are adjective. Very adverb, very adjective. Very adverb, very adjective. so long as it makes sense (e.g., with gradable adjectives; #they are very absent) so long as it makes sense (e.g., with gradable adjectives; #they are very absent) Right preposition Right preposition right over the house right over the house

Nouns and verbs Nouns have a category feature [N]. Nouns have a category feature [N]. Books [N, pl]. Books [N, pl]. Verbs have a category feature [V]. Verbs have a category feature [V]. Complained [V] Complained [V] Two independent features, four predicted categories: Two independent features, four predicted categories: [N, V](adjectives) [N, V](adjectives) [ ](prepositions) [ ](prepositions)

Binary vs. privative There’s something unsettling about saying the prepositions simply lack category features (neither nominal nor verbal). There’s something unsettling about saying the prepositions simply lack category features (neither nominal nor verbal). We can soothe ourselves somewhat by adopted binary category features instead of privative features: We can soothe ourselves somewhat by adopted binary category features instead of privative features: [+N, -V]noun [+N, -V]noun [+N, +V]adjective [+N, +V]adjective [-N, -V] preposition [-N, -V] preposition [-N, +V]verb [-N, +V]verb Same predictions, but more in line with our intuition about what “category” should be. Same predictions, but more in line with our intuition about what “category” should be.

[±N, ±V] The [±N, ±V] category system may seem a bit “out of the blue.” But it does yield some descriptive benefit. The [±N, ±V] category system may seem a bit “out of the blue.” But it does yield some descriptive benefit. Consider what un- can attach to: Consider what un- can attach to: untie, unfold, unwrap, unpack untie, unfold, unwrap, unpack unhappy, unfriendly, undead unhappy, unfriendly, undead *uncity, *uncola, *unconvention *uncity, *uncola, *unconvention *unupon, *unalongside, *unat *unupon, *unalongside, *unat Basically, it applies to reversible verbs and adjectives, but not to nouns or prepositions. How can we state that in terms of our category features? Basically, it applies to reversible verbs and adjectives, but not to nouns or prepositions. How can we state that in terms of our category features?

                      