Abstract

The primary aim in this paper is to propose a phrase structure for adjunction that is compatible with the precepts of Bare Phrase Structure (BPS). Current accounts are at odds with the central vision of BPS and current practice leans more to descriptive eclecticism than to theoretical insight. A diagnosis for this conceptual disarray is suggested here: It stems from a deeply held though seldom formulated intuition; the tacit view that adjuncts are the abnormal case while arguments describe the grammatical norm. In actuality, it is argued, adjuncts are so well behaved that they require virtually no grammatical support to function properly. Arguments, in contrast, are refractory and require grammatical aid to allow them to make any propositional contribution. This last remark should come as no surprise to those with neo-Davidsonian semantic sympathies. Connoisseurs of this art form are well versed in the important role that grammatical (aka, thematic) roles play in turning arguments into
 modifiers of events. Such fulcra are not required for meaningfully integrating adjuncts.
 into sentences. In what follows, we take this difference to be of the greatest significance
 and we ask ourselves what this might imply for the phrase structure of adjunction.

Highlights

  • It is fair to say that what adjuncts are and how they function grammatically is not well understood

  • The current wisdom comes in two parts: (i) a description of some of the salient properties of adjuncts and (ii) a technology to code their presence (Chomsky-adjunction, different labels, etc.)

  • Adjunction was an operation that returned a phrase of the same type as the one the operation had targeted. (1) formally illustrates (Chomsky-)adjunction with respect to phrases

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is fair to say that what adjuncts are and how they function grammatically is not well understood. Current approaches sin against BPS in requiring an intrinsic use of bar levels and in using idiosyncratic labeling conventions whose import is murky at best. A goal of a successful theory of adjuncts should be to come up with a coherent account of adjunction structures that (at least) allows for a relational view of bar levels along the lines of Chomsky (1995), itself following earlier suggestions of Muysken (1982). 2) proposes a strong version of the Inclusiveness Condition, one in which only intrinsic features of lexical elements can be used by the computational system This excludes, among other things, bar-level information (which is relational) from the purview of the syntax..

General Properties of Adjunction Structures
Same Labeling
No Labeling
Some Consequences
Dangling On
Concluding Remarks
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call