On equationally Noetherian predicate structures

The basis of the emergence of this research is the lack of observers or language researchers who will arouse the local language khasanah, namely Banjar Hulu language. Upstream Banjar Language is a language used by the people of Suhada Village Enok District Indragiri Hilir Regency Riau. The Banjar Hulu language is used as the majority language used by the people of Indragiri Hilir Regency Riau. However, due to the flow of modernization and assimilation will threaten the extinction and contamination of the Banjar Hulu language. Therefore, this research is expected to maintain and maintain the authenticity of Banjar Hulu language, so it is necessary to do research. This study focuses on the structure of verb phrases. With related issues about the shape or structure of the verb phrase. The purpose of the study is to describe in detail the structure of the Banjar Hulu language verb phrase. This research is a field research with qualitative type. This research was conducted in Suhada Village, Enok Sub-district, Indragiri Hilir Regency, Riau with research time for six months. The method used to collect data is by the technique of referring libat ably. The data of this research is phrase construction that comes from the speech of research informant. Data analyzing is done by technique of reduction, disply, and conclusion data. The results showed that there are various verbal phrases. This kevariasian found verbal language phrases Banjar Hulu language based on the class of formers and verbal phrase forming function, namely coordinative verbal phrases, modifikatif, and apositif. The results of this study are the first structure of verbal phrases based on the word class; (v) Verbal Phrase {V + Ajk}, (c) Verbal Phrases {Adv + V}, (d) Verbal Phrases {V + Prepositions}, (e) ) Verbal Phrases {V; (ba- + N) + pronomina}, (f) Verbal Phrases {V; (b) + A}, (g) Verbal Phrases {V; (b + + N) + N}. The two structures of the verbal phrase are based on the function of the constituent elements, which include (a) Coordinative Verbal Phrases, (b) Modifikattive Verb Phrases, (c) Apositive Verb Phrases.

The paper discusses the structure of non-verbal predication, with particular reference to the role of the copula. Differently from the main tenets of contemporary logico-philosophical and linguistic theories, a model of predication is proposed where the verbal component (specifically, tense information) is regarded as central in establishing the syntactic and semantic relation between a predicate and its subject. It is thus possible to recover some of the insights of the pre-Fregean analysis of predication. The proposed solution has a number of significant consequences for the structure to be assigned to non-verbal predication, in particular for the semantics of ‘small clause’ constituents, where the predication is established without the copula.

Linguists define language as a means to communicate. There are many varieties of language in the world; each one is somewhat independent in some aspects, but generally shares some characteristics with all the others. Languages also tend to impact each other in various ways, especially by “borrowing” words through technology and politics. There is no doubt that every language has its own set of rules and characteristics such as grammar, sentence structure, and phonetics. This paper examines the structure of verb phrases in the Kurdish language — the paper will clarify just what a verb phrase is. The X-Bar theory is used to illustrate the structure of verb phrasing in the Kurdish language. This theory dictates that each sentence structure has a “head,” and all other sentence components are under the rule of this head. In sentences, the verb is the head and rules the sentence while in phrases, the head is usually either the noun or the verb. This research will illuminate the structure of verb phrasing in the Kurdish language and compare it with that of the English language.

The study focuses on the analyses of syntactic structure of some predicates and state predicatives denoting positive emotion: veselya (to make someone happy, in a good moon), veselya se (to frolic, to party), vessel sam (to be happy), veselo (mi) e (to be in a good mood), veselba e (it is fun). Our aim is to provide a syntactic model representing argument structure of predicates and predicatives from this thematic group. The syntactic realization of arguments, semantic role hierarchy, and specifics concerning the referentiality of the nominal phrases in argument position are examined. The analyses show differences both in the semantic structure of predicates and predicatives and in the syntactic realization of their arguments. In contrast to other emotional predicates, veselya and veselya se have only nominal phrases as complements. While the analyzed verbs represent causative and dynamic predicates, respectively, the predicatives vessel, vesselo denote emotional states. Nominal phrases, as well as complement clauses can be used in complement positions. In this respect, the syntactic realization of predicatives is similar to the one of other emotional state predicatives, such as radosten sam (to be happy), radostno (mi) e (it is rejoicing).

Метою нашого дослідження було показати поняття предикативності в різних значеннях, таких як структурна ознака, основна ознака будь-якого речення чи висловлювання як мовленнєвого фрейму, ознака певного роду (або типу), яка пояснюється, насамперед, через форму дієслова, що, у свою чергу, характеризується специфічними категоріями часу, особи та способу; пояснити предикативність як синтаксичну модальність, особливу квазікомунікативну характеристику речення. Модальності, на нашу думку, відповідає предикативність. Показано, що сутність лінгвістичної трансформації полягає в тому, що під час застосування правила предикативності відбувається лінгвальна презентація вторинного присудка у структурі вторинної предикації, що у будь-якому випадку призводить до утворення окремої предикативної одиниці і, передусім, вказує на те, що речення з цими структурами містять кілька планів (або аспектів) предикації. Таким чином, аналізуючи об’єктно-предикативну структуру із використанням трансформаційного аналізу як об’єктно-інфінітивний комплекс, ми віднесли об’єктну предикативну структуру до структури вторинної предикації, яка: є бінарною структурою, що складається з вторинного підмета та вторинного присудка. Вторинний підмет виражається іменником в називному відмінку, або займенником в об’єктному відмінку. Вторинний присудок виражається неозначеною формою дієслова (інфінітивом, дієприкметником І, дієприкметником ІІ, герундієм) чи недієслівною частиною мови; залежить від структури первинної предикації, виконуючи в реченні функцію складного додатка.

Chapter 8. Predicate structure — valency-changing mechanisms

Chapter 9. Predicate structure — postural and directional suffixes

British Sign Language (BSL) signers use a variety of structures, such as constructed action (CA), depicting constructions (DCs), or lexical verbs, to represent action and other verbal meanings. This study examines the use of these verbal predicate structures and their gestural counterparts, both separately and simultaneously, in narratives by deaf children with various levels of exposure to BSL (ages 5;1 to 7;5) and deaf adult native BSL signers. Results reveal that all groups used the same types of predicative structures, including children with minimal BSL exposure. However, adults used CA, DCs, and/or lexical signs simultaneously more frequently than children. These results suggest that simultaneous use of CA with lexical and depicting predicates is more complex than the use of these predicate structures alone and thus may take deaf children more time to master.

Chapter 10. Predicate structure — auxiliary-triggering processes

Between the inflecting verb (slot D in predicate structure, as set out in 4.1) or the auxiliary of a non-inflecting verb (slot E) and tense-modal suffixes (slot G) there can be one or more members drawn from a set of about fifty-six ‘miscellaneous suffixes ‘, in slot F. These miscellaneous suffixes show a range of morphological properties. The main parameters of variation are summarized in table 5.1 (where X represents a miscellaneous suffix); note that two suffixes each occur in two types. The four types are illustrated in (5.1-4).

The present study aims to throw light on the behavior of the Spanish copulas ser and estar in locative sentences, beyond their classical distinction in terms of Individual-Level (IL) versus Stage-Level (SL) predicates. The behavior of the Spanish copulas in locative contexts constitutes an oddity that we aim to probe here: events (concierto ‘concert’), despite their clear spatial and temporal anchorage, combine with ser (El concierto es en París ‘The concert is in Paris’), which is the copula typically associated with IL or permanent predicates. To do so, we discuss the behavior of copulas as locative verbs in a broader empirical context, where not just events and individuals are considered, but also other types of nominals, such as qualities and states. We argue that ser emerges with events because time and place constituents combine directly with events, without the intermediation of extra predicational structure. When carrying a marked value, that extra predicational structure triggers the insertion of estar; when there is no predication structure (such as with events) and when the predication structure is unmarked (IL predicates), ser appears as the default copula.

The complexity of language is usually reflected in the complexity of sentences. At present, the research of sentence complexity mainly focuses on the analysis of syntactic complexity. In this paper, from the perspective of Leech's theory of sentence semantic structure, the predication structure is taken as the semantic unit to explore the sentence semantic complexity. The predication structures are extracted based on the result of sentence-based syntactic analysis, and then the linear expression sequence of a sentence is converted into a semantic hierarchy based on predicate semantic frameworks; the universality of predicate semantic frameworks is obtained by using the spectral clustering algorithm; and the sentence semantic complexity depends on the universality of predicate semantic frameworks at various layers. The experimental results show that the measurement method of sentence sematic complexity based on predicate semantic frameworks is more effective by comparing with the method that only considers the semantic categories of words in the sentence.

This Chapter presents an analysis of simple Hebrew identity sentences which I offer as a case study in the syntax of predication. Briefly, the facts are that Modern Hebrew (henceforth just ‘Hebrew’) allows assertions to be made with matrix small clauses; consisting of just a subject and a non-verbal predicate. It also allows ‘inflected small clauses’, where a pronominal copula, either personal (PronH) or impersonal (PronZ), realises Infl, and takes a non-verbal maximal projection as a complement. As far as the personal pronominal copula is concerned, it looks as if it is optional, since both inflected and non-inflected forms of the small clauses occur. However, in identity sentences, only the inflected form is possible. The point of this Chapter is to argue that the absence of uninflected identity small clauses follows from the requirement that every clause is an instance of a syntactic predication structure. I shall argue that where the post-copula XP is inherently a predicate, a predicate structure is formed whether or not Inflection is present, but that when the post-copula element is an argument and referential, Inflection is necessary to create a syntactic predication structure; furthermore, Infl is necessary to trigger the type shift which allows the identity sentence to be interpreted as a semantic predication structure.

Semantic motivation for the denotational identity of arguments in predication structuresThis text is an attempt at a preliminary outline of the factors that motivate the denotational identity of argument content in the predication structure as well as the consequences of this identity for the shape of the sentence expression which is a realization of such a structure.The first question this analysis attempts to answer concerns the structure of predicative concepts that constitute the predication structure with arguments of the identical content?The second question the cursory analysis done attempts to answer concerns the manner, in which the identity existing on the semantic structure level is signaled on the surface, in the formal structure.

Reviewed by: The syntax of Spanish by Karen Zagona Stuart Robinson The syntax of Spanish. By Karen Zagona. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Pp. 286. ISBN 0521576849. $25. The syntax of Spanish is part of the relatively new series ‘Cambridge syntax guides’. It consists of six chapters. Ch. 1 (1–72) provides a good descriptive overview of Spanish syntax. Ch. 2 (73–117) deals with noun phrases (NPs); it examines their role as arguments and as predicates and analyzes their internal constituent structure. Ch. 3 (118–57) covers the [End Page 825] structure of verb phrases (VPs); it distinguishes between arguments and adjuncts, contrasts direct and indirect objects, and deals with the analysis of ‘unaccusative’ verbs. Ch. 4 (158–201) handles ‘functional categories’: tense, aspect, and negation, and their interaction with auxiliaries and clitics. Ch. 5 (202–40) comes to grips with the language’s flexible constituent order and surveys various attempts to account for this flexibility in terms of pragmatic notions like topic and focus. Finally, Ch. 6 (241–72) deals with different types of movement and the constraints that operate on them. The book downplays dialectal variation and therefore presents Spanish syntax as being fairly uniform despite its wide geographic spread. While this may be controversial, it is nevertheless intentional, judging from the author’s observation that there is in Spanish ‘a rich range of phonological and morphological variations in the grammar, but less variation in the syntax’ (4–5). In the preface, it is claimed that the book assumes no familiarity with current theory. This is true only if current theory is taken to be the latest word on minimalism; though accessible, it would be difficult reading without at least passing familiarity with the principles-and-parameters framework. For example, there is talk of ‘base-generated traces’ (110) a few pages before the concept receives any explanation, and even in the descriptive overview a good deal of generative language is used (for example, talk of functional categories ‘governing’ lexical categories). As is still the case in most of the generative literature, the majority of the example sentences in the book are artificial, and it is not always clear where they originate (presumably with the author in most cases). Better identification of sources would be desirable. Furthermore, the exclusive reliance on invented examples is methodologically questionable, especially for the material covered in Ch. 5, which deals with the analysis of constituent order. All things considered, The syntax of Spanish is a good overview of its subject matter and a welcome addition to a worthwhile series. Stuart Robinson Max Planck Institut für Psycholinguistik Copyright © 2003 Linguistic Society of America