Sag et al., Sag et al., Chapter 4 Chapter 4

Complex Feature ValuesComplex Feature Values

10/7/0410/7/04

Michael MulyarMichael Mulyar

Complex Feature StructuresComplex Feature Structures

Main point of this chapter: Complex Main point of this chapter: Complex feature structures are used to feature structures are used to describe the notion of Valence. This describe the notion of Valence. This greatly simplifies the grammar rules greatly simplifies the grammar rules and collapses the distinction between and collapses the distinction between words and phrases into one between words and phrases into one between complete (SATURATED) constituents complete (SATURATED) constituents and ones which lexically require and ones which lexically require complementation. complementation.

QuestionQuestion

Does one need phrase structure Does one need phrase structure rules, given the notion of rules, given the notion of SATURATION?SATURATION?

QuantifiersQuantifiers CoordinationCoordination ModificationModification

ExamplesExamples

(1) Pat relies on Kim.(1) Pat relies on Kim.

(2) *Pat relies.(2) *Pat relies.

(3) The child put the toy on the table.(3) The child put the toy on the table.

(4) *The child put the toy.(4) *The child put the toy.

The notion of valence—a verb requires The notion of valence—a verb requires complements, as lexically specified. Verbs also complements, as lexically specified. Verbs also require specifiers [Fillmore’s Subject Principle].require specifiers [Fillmore’s Subject Principle].

Architecture: Architecture: The Phrase Structure RulesThe Phrase Structure Rules

Lexical head-complementationLexical head-complementation Phrasal head-specificationPhrasal head-specification

Advantages: specifiers not embedded Advantages: specifiers not embedded into complement rules; consistent into complement rules; consistent with analysis of NOM in Ch 1; avoids with analysis of NOM in Ch 1; avoids underspecification (e.g. no grammar underspecification (e.g. no grammar rules without phrases).rules without phrases).

Implementation: Implementation: Feature Structure ListsFeature Structure Lists

VAL features COMPS and SPR VAL features COMPS and SPR described using feature structures described using feature structures (not atomic). (not atomic).

Feature structure lists used, where Feature structure lists used, where more than one argument is required.more than one argument is required.

Ordering in feature lists consistent Ordering in feature lists consistent with linear word order.with linear word order.

COMPS FeatureCOMPS Feature

Transitive Verb Transitive Verb

COMPSCOMPS HEAD HEAD nounnoun SPRSPR ++

Abbreviated: [ COMPS <NP> ].Abbreviated: [ COMPS <NP> ]. Feature structure lists, e.g. Feature structure lists, e.g. put put [ COMPS <NP, [ COMPS <NP,

PP> ].PP> ]. Big advantage: this approach is flexible, i.e. will Big advantage: this approach is flexible, i.e. will

work with nouns, adjectives, etc. (Reduces need work with nouns, adjectives, etc. (Reduces need for categories! More on this later) for categories! More on this later)

QuestionsQuestions

(1) How to specify a complement PP? (1) How to specify a complement PP? e.g. e.g. He put the book on the table He put the book on the table vs. vs. **He put the book of the table.He put the book of the table.

(2) What about multiple complement (2) What about multiple complement frames? frames?

Head-Complement RuleHead-Complement Rule

Phrase Independent!Phrase Independent! Predicts a flat structure for the Predicts a flat structure for the

English VP.English VP.

phrase phrase H H word word 1…n1…n

VAL [COMPS < >]VAL [COMPS < >] VAL [COMPS <1…n>]VAL [COMPS <1…n>]

SpecifiersSpecifiers

Verbs and common nouns require Verbs and common nouns require specifiers (more on quantifiers later).specifiers (more on quantifiers later).

Specification implemented phrasally Specification implemented phrasally (avoids groupings like [the book] (avoids groupings like [the book] [about Jim]). That is, only [about Jim]). That is, only constituents with COMPS <> can be constituents with COMPS <> can be used with head-specification.used with head-specification.

Head-Specifier RuleHead-Specifier Rule

phrasephrase 1 1 H H VALVAL SPR SPR <1><1>

VAL [SPR <>]VAL [SPR <>] COMPS COMPS <> <>

The Valence PrincipleThe Valence Principle

“ “Unless the rule says otherwise, the Unless the rule says otherwise, the mother’s values for the VAL features mother’s values for the VAL features (SPR and COMPS) are identical to (SPR and COMPS) are identical to those of the head daughter.” (p. 106)those of the head daughter.” (p. 106)

Words and PhrasesWords and Phrases

SPR and COMPS features allow to SPR and COMPS features allow to dispense with distinctions between N dispense with distinctions between N and NOM; VP and V.and NOM; VP and V.

Names can still be applied, but these Names can still be applied, but these are no longer vital, since valence are no longer vital, since valence specification collapses the distinction specification collapses the distinction between words and phrases.between words and phrases.

Non-branching domination no longer Non-branching domination no longer needed.needed.

Applying the system: Case Applying the system: Case Marking in Pipil (Problem 4)Marking in Pipil (Problem 4)

Data in problem 4 shows that Pipil is Data in problem 4 shows that Pipil is a verb initial language. (VOS in a verb initial language. (VOS in transitive sentences and VS in transitive sentences and VS in intransitive sentences.)intransitive sentences.)

Nouns require a determiner (Nouns require a determiner (nene).). Thus, head-specification only applies Thus, head-specification only applies

to nouns. (Verbs are SPR <>). to nouns. (Verbs are SPR <>). English style head-complement rule English style head-complement rule will work so long as case is specified. will work so long as case is specified.

Pipil, cont.Pipil, cont. From what we can tell, case marking From what we can tell, case marking

is tripartite (S, A, and P).is tripartite (S, A, and P). Supposing that case is a lexical Supposing that case is a lexical

feature of the noun (a head feature feature of the noun (a head feature CASE), we can write the following CASE), we can write the following rule:rule:

phrase phrase H H word word 1…n 1…n

VAL [COMPS < >] VAL [COMPS < >] VAL [COMPS <1…n>] VAL [COMPS <1…n>] 1 HEAD noun1 HEAD noun

CASE (S | P)CASE (S | P)

Agreement (A Lexical Agreement (A Lexical Analysis)Analysis)

Ch 3 grammar treated agreement via Ch 3 grammar treated agreement via a rule of grammar (e.g. AGR values a rule of grammar (e.g. AGR values for NP subjects and VPs must be for NP subjects and VPs must be identical).identical).

Other heads, however, (adjectives Other heads, however, (adjectives and PPs) are not specified for AGR. and PPs) are not specified for AGR. (Example 31, p. 107). (Example 31, p. 107).

Sag proposes a lexical solution: verbs Sag proposes a lexical solution: verbs and common nouns only need agree and common nouns only need agree with their specifiers.with their specifiers.

SHAC (Specifier-Head SHAC (Specifier-Head Agreement Constraint)Agreement Constraint)

Applies only to verbs and common Applies only to verbs and common nounsnouns

HEAD HEAD [AGR 1][AGR 1]

VALVAL [SPR < [AGR 1] >][SPR < [AGR 1] >]

Can be applied to determiner-noun Can be applied to determiner-noun agreement (more on quantifiers below).agreement (more on quantifiers below).

Extending the formalism: Extending the formalism: Count and Mass NounsCount and Mass Nouns

Sag argues that the count / mass Sag argues that the count / mass distinction is not entirely semantic. distinction is not entirely semantic.

All smaller portions of furniture are not All smaller portions of furniture are not furniture? (Not infinitely divisible, though.)furniture? (Not infinitely divisible, though.)

Nouns specify for determiners (+COUNT or Nouns specify for determiners (+COUNT or –COUNT), but are themselves unmarked –COUNT), but are themselves unmarked for the feature COUNT.for the feature COUNT.

The feature COUNT does not project to the The feature COUNT does not project to the phrasal level (e.g. SPR <> feature is used phrasal level (e.g. SPR <> feature is used instead). Sag argues that this is consistent instead). Sag argues that this is consistent with the observation that no English verb with the observation that no English verb requires only either count or mass nouns. requires only either count or mass nouns.

Quantifiers Quantifiers Quantifiers like Quantifiers like much much or or little little are –COUNT; are –COUNT;

quantifiers like quantifiers like a a or or every every are +COUNT.are +COUNT. How does the formalism account for:How does the formalism account for:(1) Much furniture was broken.(1) Much furniture was broken.(2)(2) *Much furniture looks bad.*Much furniture looks bad.(3) Some furniture looks bad.(3) Some furniture looks bad.Is (2) a problem for Sag’s prediction?Is (2) a problem for Sag’s prediction?

Justice Justice or or peace peace SPR <>, but occur with some SPR <>, but occur with some quantifiers?quantifiers?

Coordination: A first Coordination: A first approachapproach

The coordination rule in Ch 3 only The coordination rule in Ch 3 only allows coordination of conjuncts with allows coordination of conjuncts with identical head values. This clearly identical head values. This clearly undergenerates.undergenerates.

Sag’s first suggestion is to coordinate Sag’s first suggestion is to coordinate conjuncts with identical Valence. conjuncts with identical Valence. (Rule 55, p. 116).(Rule 55, p. 116).

The rule overgenerates somewhat, as The rule overgenerates somewhat, as NP and S have equivalent valence but NP and S have equivalent valence but do not combine (Example 56). do not combine (Example 56).

CoordinationCoordination

Pos and coordination.Pos and coordination. Ellipsis must be accounted for:Ellipsis must be accounted for:

John reads and writes letters.John reads and writes letters.

(not generated by head-(not generated by head-complementation rule)complementation rule)

John reads and sends Bill letters.John reads and sends Bill letters.

(not elliptical, as grammar correctly (not elliptical, as grammar correctly generates!)generates!)