Introduction to WG syntax

1. Word-word relations are concepts Introduction to WG syntax Richard Hudson Joensuu November 2010

2. The challenge • How to go beyond single words • to combinations of words • to general patterns • This is the domain of syntax • the study of how words combine • including general rules

3. Influences on Word Grammar syntax • Tesnière (France, 1893-1954) • dependency structure, not phrase structure • Halliday (UK, 1925-) • labeled grammatical functions • Chomsky (USA, 1928-) • abstract structures

4. An example Try using dependency structures! object subject pre- adjunct predic- ative [you] subject

5. Dependency grammar • History • Panini (350 BC) • Arabic grammarians (700s+) • Some traditional school grammar (1800s) • Russia (e.g. Mel’cuk) • Germany (e.g. Kunze) • Finland (e.g. Karlsson)

6. Why not phrase structure? • Basic assumption of PS: • We cannot relate words directly to each other. • Why not? • What about other areas of thought? • Social relations: we relate people to each other. • Spatial relations: we relate objects to each other.

7. My family network me Gretta John father mother mother father brother Gaynor Colin daughter daughter grandson Lucy Alice son Peter

8. Relations in WG • Relations are classified • ‘mother’, ‘son’, etc. • Each relation is a concept • just like entities such as ‘dog’ or ‘running’ • but relations have an ‘argument’ and a ‘value’ • Similarly, we classify dependencies • ‘subject’, ‘adjunct’, etc. • Traditional 'grammatical functions'.

9. Generalising in syntax • Words are classified by word classes • Dependencies are classified by functions • Each of these classifications forms a taxonomy • a hierarchy of increasingly specific categories

10. The word-class taxonomy word verb adjective …. noun auxiliary common BIG CAN DOG

11. Generalising in a network • A 'rule' is a property applied by inheritance • e.g. 'A word has a meaning' • Rules are more or less general, but combine freely by inheritance • A verb has a subject • TAKE has an object • So: takes has a subject and an object • and a meaning

12. The grammatical-function hierarchy dependent valent adjunct subject complement object predicative

13. Generalising across dependencies • Again, rules may be more or less general • a word stands before its dependents • a verb stands after its subject • an interrogative auxiliary verb stands before its subject. • Thanks to default inheritance, the most specific rule always wins. • In other words, rules have exceptions.

14. Abstractrelations in syntax • Syntax is abstract! • Dependencies are very abstract • defined by many different properties • Dependencies can also be complex • One word may depend on many others. • Mutual dependency is possible.

15. A complex syntactic network What did you say? extractee predicative subject subject complement extractee & object

16. Simple syntax a book about the idea of a life after death

17. Abstract words in syntax • Maybe a complete analysis should recognise abstract, unrealised, words? • E.g. [you] as the subject of an imperative? • Why not, if words are concepts? • We have a concept for 'Superman' • But we also know he doesn't exist • Similarly for the realisation of [you].

18. Researching syntax Here too, networks are everywhere. • Inside syntax • What about constructions? • Between syntax and morphology • Between syntax and semantics • Between syntax and sociolinguistics • Between syntax and psycholinguistics • Between syntax and education

19. Constructions are dependency networks

20. Researching syntax and morphology • Syntactic words are realized by morphological structures • e.g. 'WALK, past' realized by {{walk}{ed}} • Words usually have their own morphology. • But clitics are different • e.g. for 'YOU' + 'BE, present': {{you}{'re}}

21. French pronouns Paul mange la pomme apple P eats the {mange}} {Paul} {mange} {pomme} {Paul} { {la}

22. Researching syntax and semantics • Each word token inherits a sense • e.g. 'dog', 'eating', 'in' • But this sense is modified by the dependents • e.g. 'big dog', 'eating breakfast', 'in bed' • Exactly how do dependents modify senses?

23. Simple syntax, complex meaning then < now me eating breakfast then I ate breakfast. me eating breakfast eating breakfast speaker breakfast eating

24. Researching syntax and sociolinguistics • Syntactic patterns may have social meaning • Professor Hudson ~ Dick ~ Dad ~ Grandpa • he is ~ he's • which I live in ~ in which I live • we were ~ we was • I didn't do anything ~ I didn't do nothing. • How does syntax relate to social context?

25. Inherent variability speaker local person • we was BE, past educated person speaker • we were

26. Researching syntax and psycholinguistics • Syntactic structure influences processing • Some structures are harder than others • That Finland has the best schools in the world is generally agreed. • Simpler but harder • It is generally agreed that Finland has the best schools in the world. • More complex but easier

27. Extraposition 8 words That Finland has the best schools in the world is certain. 1 word It is certain that Finland has the best schools in the world.

28. Researching syntax and education • Our syntactic knowledge grows all through life: • new constructions • Try as he might, he couldn't open it. • new details of existing constructions • possibility of, opportunity to • Much of this growth happens at school.

29. Subordinate clauses per 100 words:influence of age and grade

30. Research questions for education • What causes growth in syntax? • general cognitive growth, e.g. memory • growth in the language network • Can grammatical analysis improve writing? • Yes! • recent research by Debra Myhill • How can teachers help?

31. Kiitos • This slideshow can be downloaded from www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/talks.htm • For more on Word Grammar, see www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/wg.htm • My home page, with email address: www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/home.htm