Event Structure and Verbal Decomposition

2019 ◽  
pp. 313-341
Author(s):  
Gillian Ramchand
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Semantic Representations ◽  
Structural Interpretation ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter explores the relationship between constrained semantic representations of events, and structured syntactic representations that express them. I show that these representations track each other systematically, and that argument structure generalizations emerge in lock-step with these structures. I therefore propose a system in which those generalizations follow from the following general principles of structural interpretation: (i) embedding corresponds to the cause/leads to relation; (ii) each subevental structure is related potentially to a participant NP; (iii) event-recursion is limited to structures with at most one dynamic predication per event phase. The maximal subevental structure consists of a stative predication embedding a dynamic one, and the dynamic one in turn embedding a stative one. This structure and its proper subsets exhaust the event types built by the grammar. These principles ensure the relative prominence of the different argument positions as well as specific entailments for the different positions.

On the Event Structural Properties of the English Get-Passive

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-74
Author(s):  
Alison Biggs ◽  
David Embick
Keyword(s):  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Structural Properties ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Event Structures ◽  
Structural Differences ◽  
Responsible Party

An important ongoing discussion in theories of argument structure concerns the explanatory division of labor between thematic properties and event structure. In this context, the English get-passive provides an interesting test case. Much previous work has analyzed get-passives as differing thematically from be-passives. Yet many get-passive properties remain poorly understood. We present an analysis of the get-passive centered on the proposal that it contains additional event structure (realized as get) relative to its be counterpart. We employ by-adjuncts to identify the event structures in passive types, and demonstrate that the behavior of this and other diagnostics support the conclusion that get- and be-passives differ systematically in ways that accord with our analysis. Further discussion considers the prominent proposal from previous studies that get-passives differ thematically from be-passives in (sometimes) assigning an Agent role to their surface subjects. We show that there is no evidence for such an analysis. Instead, intuitions about the interpretation of the get-passive surface subject arise from how an event’s Responsible Party is identified: contrasts between get and be on this dimension are a consequence of event structural differences between the two. The overall result is a unified analysis of the get-passive, one that has implications for the role of event structure in understanding the syntax and interpretation of arguments.

Changes in the argument and event structure of psych verbs in the history of Spanish

2019 ◽  
pp. 249-270
Author(s):  
Montserrat Batllori ◽  
Elisabeth Gibert-Sotelo ◽  
Isabel Pujol
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Psych Verbs ◽  
History Of

This chapter offers a detailed study of changes affecting the argument structure of Spanish psych verbs that appear with a dative experiencer (EXP). After proposing a three-way classification of these verbs based on their etymological origin, the chapter traces two parallel, but interconnected, diachronic paths: the first one involves the development from transitive (or pronominal) to unaccusative constructions with a dative EXP, whereas the second one concerns the evolution from dynamic to stative events. The use and decrease of the passive in Classical Spanish is also shown to play a role in this change: to wit, passive and unaccusative structures with a dative EXP are structurally similar, as the prepositional agent phrase and the dative EXP originate in the same position.

From Argument Diagrams to Argumentation Mining in Texts

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Peldszus ◽  
Manfred Stede
Keyword(s):  
Computational Linguistics ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Automatic Analysis ◽  
Critical Survey ◽  
Formal Representation ◽  
Rhetorical Structure ◽  
Analysis Process ◽  
Argumentation Mining ◽  
The Relationship

In this paper, the authors consider argument mining as the task of building a formal representation for an argumentative piece of text. Their goal is to provide a critical survey of the literature on both the resulting representations (i.e., argument diagramming techniques) and on the various aspects of the automatic analysis process. For representation, the authors also provide a synthesized proposal of a scheme that combines advantages from several of the earlier approaches; in addition, the authors discuss the relationship between representing argument structure and the rhetorical structure of texts in the sense of Mann and Thompsons (1988) RST. Then, for the argument mining problem, the authors also cover the literature on closely-related tasks that have been tackled in Computational Linguistics, because they think that these can contribute to more powerful argument mining systems than the first prototypes that were built in recent years. The paper concludes with the authors’ suggestions for the major challenges that should be addressed in the field of argument mining.

Adjectives and Event Structure

2019 ◽  
pp. 367-392
Author(s):  
Rebekah Baglini ◽  
Christopher Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Structural Properties ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Scale Structure ◽  
Verbal Aspect ◽  
Verb Phrase ◽  
Alternative Approaches ◽  
Scalar Properties ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Way

This chapter investigates the relationship between adjectives and event structure by looking at properties of deverbal adjectives and deadjectival verbs. Although simple adjectives are not eventive, they nevertheless play an important role in matters of event structure, both in the way that they influence the eventive properties of verbs that they are derivationally related to, and in the way that an understanding of the scalar properties of adjectival meaning informs theorizing about eventive meanings. Although often considered in isolation, we show that adjectival gradability and verbal aspect are intimately related scalar phenomena. The structural properties of an adjectival scale determine the aspectual class of a derived event predicate. Similarly, the aspectual structure of a verb phrase constrains the scale structure of an adjectival participle. Our discussion focuses primarily on degree-based approaches to these phenomena, but we also consider alternative approaches based in a more articulated ontology for states.

scholarly journals Time and the event: The semantics of Russian prefixes

Nordlyd ◽  
10.7557/12.72 ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gillian Ramchand
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Temporal Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Temporal Domain ◽  
Structure Level ◽  
Verb Forms ◽  
Basic Distinction ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The One ◽  
Structure Domain

In this paper, I draw on data from prefixation in Russian to argue for a basic distinction between event structure and temporal struc- ture. I present a linguistic semantics of verb and argument structure interpretation on the one hand, and a formal semantic implementa- tion of 'telicity' on the other, which makes sense of the generalisations apparently common to both domains. I will claim that the temporal domain embeds the event structure domain, and that the latter con- strains the former. At the same time, the different formal primitives that operate at the levels proposed form the basis for a principled linguistic distinction between the two tiers of composition: the event structure level encodes subevental relations and predicational rela- tions within those subevents; the temporal structure level introduces a t variable explicitly and relates it to the structure built up by the event level. Whether the event structure is homogenous or not will have an impact on whether the temporal variable chosen will be 'def- inite' or 'indefinite.' This latter claim then forms the basis for a new conception of the difference between perfective and imperfective verb forms in Russian.

scholarly journals ‘Future Talk’ in Newspaper Editorials: Predictions and Their Role in Argumentative Discourse

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Farzana Masroor ◽  
Muhammad Yousaf ◽  
Azhar Habib ◽  
Ijaz Ali Khan
Keyword(s):  
Speech Acts ◽  
Argument Structure ◽  
Opinion Leaders ◽  
Argumentative Discourse ◽  
Course Of Action ◽  
The Future ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Newspaper Editorials

Newspaper editorials are known for taking a stance while fulfilling their goals of persuading the audience. In this regard, making future predictions is a crucial strategy in the argument structure of editorials. They are considered as risky acts since they are meant to outline future course of action as well as outcomes of such actions for their audience. This research is focused on the analysis of the speech acts of predictions among newspaper editorials of Pakistani, American and Malaysian newspapers. The analysis is focused on the exploration of forms, force and occurrence of these acts. The results indicate the preference of Pakistani and American newspapers in using strong predictions. The Malaysian newspaper meanwhile is found to be less explicit when predicting the future. This is indicated by less use of the strategy as well as adoption of implicit ways to express propositions related to the future. The results affirm the role of editorials as opinion leaders in their respective societies and the differences across cultures can be interpreted with respect to the extra linguistic and contextual factors that control editorial structures and strategies. The findings of the study are useful for future researchers to explore the relationship of language and its communicative purpose especially when fulfilling the goals of persuasion across cultures and contexts.

The Verbal Domain

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Argument Structure ◽  
Event Structure ◽  
Cutting Edge ◽  
External Argument ◽  
Structural Units ◽  
Contemporary Debate ◽  
The Third ◽  
Inner Aspect ◽  
One To One ◽  
The One

The structure of the VP, its complexity, its semantics, its function, and the universality of the heads that it contains are a fascinating puzzle. A lot of progress has been made: this volume features cutting-edge research on the verbal domain, while tackling the problem of the nature and structure of the vP-VP domain. It includes some chapters based on papers presented at the “Little v” workshop which was held at Leiden University on October 25–26, 2013. The volume is divided into three main sections, representing the areas in which contemporary debate on the verbal domain is most active. The first part, entitled Root and Verbalizer, includes four chapters discussing the setup of verbal roots, their syntax, and their combination with other functional heads like Voice and v. This part focuses on the V head. The second section, Voice, discusses the content and necessity of a Voice head in the structure of a clause, and whether Voice is different from v. Voice was originally intended as the head hosting the external argument in its specifier, as well as transitivity. This section explores its relationship with “syntactic” voice, intended as the alternation between actives and passives. The third section, Event and Argument Structure, is dedicated to event structure, inner aspect, and Aktionsart. The main issues it tackles are the one-to-one relation between argument structure and event structure, and whether there can be minimal structural units at the basis of the derivation of any sort of XP, including the VP.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document