Lexical Functional Grammar as a Construction Grammar

Findlay, Jamie Y.

doi:10.15398/jlm.v11i2.338

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Lexical Functional Grammar as a Construction Grammar

Autorzy

Findlay Jamie Y.

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15398/jlm.v11i2.338

Warianty tytułu

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG) is a lexicalist, constraint-basedgrammatical theory that shares a lot of the basic assumptions of Con-struction Grammar (CxG), such as a commitment to surface-orienteddescriptions (no transformations), and the simultaneous representa-tion of form, meaning, and other grammatical information (no deriva-tions). Nevertheless, LFG is not standardly viewed as a kind of CxG,in particular since its adherence to the principle of Lexical Integritymeans that it insists on a strict morphology-syntax distinction whereCxG canonically rejects such a divide. However, such a distinction isin fact entirely compatible with CxG assumptions; the actual problemwith viewing LFG as a CxG is the difficulty it has in describing themore substantive end of the schematic-substantive spectrum of con-structions. I suggest that by replacing the limited context-free gram-mar base of LFG responsible for this shortcoming with a more expres-sive formalism (in this case a description-based tree-adjoining gram-mar), we can obtain a fully constructional LFG, suitable as a formalframework for CxG.

Słowa kluczowe

Lexical Functional Grammar Construction Grammar lexical integrity meta-theory

Wydawca

Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN

Czasopismo

Journal of Language Modelling

Rocznik

2023

Tom

Vol. 11, No. 2

Strony

197--266

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 160 poz., RYS.

Twórcy

autor

Findlay Jamie Y.

jamie.findlay@iln.uio.no

Department of Linguisticsand Nordic Studies University of Oslo, Oslo

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7700-1525

Bibliografia

1. Anne ABEILLÉ and Owen RAMBOW (2000), Tree Adjoining Grammar: anoverview, in Anne ABEILLÉ and Owen RAMBOW, editors,Tree AdjoiningGrammars: formalisms, linguistic analysis and processing, pp. 1-68, CSLIPublications, Stanford, CA.
2. Peter ACKEMA and Ad NEELEMAN (2004),Beyond morphology: interfaceconditions on word formation, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
3. Stephen R. ANDERSON (1992),A-morphous morphology, Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge.
4. Avery D. ANDREWS (2008), The role of PRED in LFG+Glue, in Miriam BUTTand Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of the LFG08 Conference,pp. 46-67, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA,http://www.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/13/papers/lfg08andrews.pdf.
5. Doug ARNOLD (2015), A Glue Semantics for structurally regular MWEs, posterpresented at the PARSEME 5th general meeting, 23-24th September 2015, Iaşi,Romania.
6. Ash ASUDEH (2012),The logic of pronominal resumption, Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford.
7. Ash ASUDEH, Mary DALRYMPLE, and Ida TOIVONEN (2013), Constructionswith Lexical Integrity,Journal of Language Modelling, 1(1):1-54, https://doi.org/10.15398/jlm.v1i1.56.
8. Ash ASUDEH and Gianluca GIORGOLO (2012), Flexible composition foroptional and derived arguments, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING,editors,Proceedings of the LFG12 Conference, pp. 64-84, CSLI Publications,Stanford, CA,http://www.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/17/papers/lfg12asudehgiorgolo.pdf.
9. Ash ASUDEH, Gianluca GIORGOLO, and Ida TOIVONEN (2014), Meaning andvalency, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of theLFG14 Conference, pp. 68-88, CSLI Publications,http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/19/papers/lfg14asudehetal.pdf.
10. Ash ASUDEH, Paul B. MELCHIN, and Daniel SIDDIQI (2021), Constraints all theway down: DM in a representational model of grammar, inProceedings of the39th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, Cascadilla Press, Somerville,MA.
11. Ash ASUDEH and Daniel SIDDIQI (2022), Realizational morphosyntax in LRFG,in Miriam BUTT, Jamie Y. FINDLAY, and Ida TOIVONEN, editors,Proceedings ofthe LFG’22 Conference, pp. 21-40, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA,https://ojs.ub.uni-konstanz.de/lfg/index.php/main/article/view/20/.
12. Ash ASUDEH and Daniel SIDDIQI (to appear), Morphology in LFG, in MaryDALRYMPLE, editor,The handbook of Lexical Functional Grammar, LanguageScience Press, Berlin.
13. Ash ASUDEH and Ida TOIVONEN (2015), Lexical-Functional Grammar, in BerndHEINE and Heiko NARROG, editors,The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis,pp. 373-406, Oxford University Press, Oxford, second edition, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199677078.013.0017.
14. Sascha BARGMANN and Manfred SAILER (2018), The syntactic flexibility ofsemantically non-decomposable idioms, in Manfred SAILER and Stella MARKANTONATOU, editors,Multiword expressions: insights from a multi-lingualperspective, pp. 1-29, Language Science Press, Berlin,http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/184.
15. Tilman BECKER, Aravind K. JOSHI, and Owen RAMBOW (1991), Long-distancescrambling and Tree Adjoining Grammars, inProceedings of the Fifth Conferenceof the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL1991), Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin,https://aclanthology.org/E91-1005.
16. Benjamin K. BERGEN and Nancy CHANG (2005), Embodied ConstructionGrammar in simulation-based language understanding, in Jan-Ola ÖSTMAN andMirjam FRIED, editors,Construction Grammars: cognitive grounding andtheoretical extensions, pp. 147-190, John Benjamins Publishing Co., Amsterdam.
17. Robert C. BERWICK (1982), Computational complexity and Lexical-FunctionalGrammar,American Journal of Computational Linguistics, 8(3-4):97-109,https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=981926.
18. Hans C. BOAS and Ivan A. SAG, editors (2012),Sign-Based ConstructionGrammar, number 193 in CSLI Lecture Notes, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
19. J. Kathryn BOCK and Willem J. M. LEVELT (1994), Language production:grammatical encoding, in Morton A. GERNSBACHER, editor,Handbook ofpsycholinguistics, pp. 945-984, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
20. Rens BOD and Ronald KAPLAN (1998), A probabilistic corpus-driven model forLexical-Functional analysis, inProceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of theAssociation for Computational Linguistics and 17th International Conference onComputational Linguistics, Volume 1, pp. 145-151, Association for ComputationalLinguistics,http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P98-1022.
21. Dwight L. BOLINGER (1968), Entailment and the meaning of structures,Glossa,2(2):119-127.
22. Kersti BÖRJARS, Rachel NORDLINGER, and Louisa SADLER (2019),Lexical-Functional Grammar: an introduction, Cambridge University Press,Cambridge, doi:10.1017/9781316756584.
23. Joan BRESNAN (1982), The passive in lexical theory, in Joan BRESNAN, editor,The mental representation of grammatical relations, pp. 3-86, MIT Press,Cambridge, MA.
24. Joan BRESNAN (1995), Linear order, syntactic rank, and empty categories: onweak crossover, in Mary DALRYMPLE, Ronald M. KAPLAN, John T. MAXWELL,III, and Annie ZAENEN, editors,Formal issues in Lexical-Functional Grammar,pp. 241-274, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
25. Joan BRESNAN (1998), Morphology competes with syntax: explainingtypological variation in weak crossover effects, in Pilar BARBOSA, Danny FOX, Paul HAGSTROM, Martha MCGINNIS, and David PESETSKY, editors,Is the bestgood enough? Optimality and competition in syntax, MIT Press and MIT WorkingPapers in Linguistics, Cambridge, MA.
26. Joan BRESNAN, Ash ASUDEH, Ida TOIVONEN, and Stephen WECHSLER (2016),Lexical-functional syntax, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, second edition.
27. Joan BRESNAN and Sam A. MCHOMBO (1987), Topic, pronoun, and agreementin Chicheŵa,Language, 63(4):741-782.
28. Joan BRESNAN and Sam A. MCHOMBO (1995), The lexical integrity principle:evidence from Bantu,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 13(2):181-254, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00992782.
29. Benjamin BRUENING (2018), The lexicalist hypothesis: both wrong andsuperfluous,Language, 94(1):1-42, https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0000.
30. Miriam BUTT, Mary DALRYMPLE, and Anette FRANK (1997), An architecturefor linking theory in LFG, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of the LFG97 Conference, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/LFG2-1997/lfg97butt-dalrymple-frank.pdf.
31. Miriam BUTT, Helge DYVIK, Tracy Holloway KING, Hiroshi MASUICHI, andChristian ROHRER (2002), The Parallel Grammar project, inProceedings of theworkshop on grammar engineering and evaluation (COLING-02), Association forComputational Linguistics, https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W02-1503.pdf.
32. Miriam BUTT, María-Eugenia NIÑO, and Frédérique SEGOND (1996),Multilingual processing of auxiliaries in LFG, in Dafydd GIBBON, editor,Naturallanguage processing and speech technology: results of the 3rd KONVENS conference,Bielefeld, October 1996, pp. 111-122.
33. Bert CAPPELLE (2022), Lexical Integrity: a mere construct or more aconstruction?,Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association,10:183-216, https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2022-0009.
34. Andrew CARNIE (2000), On the definition of X0and XP,Syntax, 3(2):59-106.
35. Noam CHOMSKY (1957),Syntactic structures, Mouton, The Hague.
36. Noam CHOMSKY (1970), Remarks on nominalization, in Roderick A. JACOBS and Peter S. ROSENBAUM, editors, Readings in English transformational grammar, pp. 184-221, Ginn, Waltham, MA.
37. Noam CHOMSKY (1993), A minimalist program for linguistic theory, inKenneth HALE and Samuel KEYSER, editors,The view from Building 20: essays inlinguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, pp. 1-52, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
38. Noam CHOMSKY (1995), The Minimalist Program, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
39. Benoît CRABBÉ, Denys DUCHIER, Claire GARDENT, Joseph Le ROUX, and Yannick PARMENTIER (2013), XMG: eXtensible MetaGrammar, Computational Linguistics, 39(3):591-629, doi:10.1162/COLI_a_00144.
40. William CROFT (2001), Radical Construction Grammar: syntactic theory intypological perspective, Oxford University Press, Oxford, doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001.
41. Dick CROUCH, Mary DALRYMPLE, Ronald M. KAPLAN, Tracy Holloway KING, John T. MAXWELL III, and Paula NEWMAN (2017), XLE documentation, Palo Alto Research Center (PARC), Palo Alto, CA., https://ling.sprachwiss.uni-konstanz.de/pages/xle/doc/xle_toc.html.
42. Peter W. CULICOVER and Ray JACKENDOFF (1999), The view from theperiphery: the English comparative correlative, Linguistic Inquiry, 30(4):543-571.
43. Peter W. CULICOVER and Ray JACKENDOFF (2005),Simpler syntax, OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford.
44. Chris CULY (1985), The complexity of the vocabulary of Bambara,Linguisticsand Philosophy, 8(3):345-351, doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3401-6_14.
45. Haskell B. CURRY and Robert FEYS (1958), Combinatory logic: volume I, North Holland, Amsterdam.
46. Mary DALRYMPLE, editor (1999), Semantics and syntax in Lexical Functional Grammar: the resource logic approach, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
47. Mary DALRYMPLE (2001), Lexical Functional Grammar, number 34 in Syntax and Semantics, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
48. Mary DALRYMPLE (2015), Morphology in the LFG architecture, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Proceedings of the LFG15 Conference, pp. 64-83, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/20/papers/lfg15dalrymple.pdf.
49. Mary DALRYMPLE, editor (forthcoming), The Handbook of Lexical Functional Grammar, Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax, Language Science Press, Berlin.
50. Mary DALRYMPLE and Jamie Y. FINDLAY (2019), Lexical Functional Grammar, in András KERTÉSZ, Edith MORAVCSIK, and Csilla RÁKOSI, editors,Currentapproaches to syntax: a comparative handbook, pp. 123-154, De Gruyter Mouton,Berlin, doi:10.1515/9783110540253-005.
51. Mary DALRYMPLE, Ronald M. KAPLAN, and Tracy Holloway KING (2001), Weak crossover and the absence of traces, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, pp. 66-82, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, https://typo.uni-konstanz.de/lfg-proceedings/LFGprocCSLI/LFG2001/pdfs/lfg01dalrympleetal.pdf.
52. Mary DALRYMPLE, Ronald M. KAPLAN, and Tracy Holloway KING (2004),Linguistic generalizations over descriptions, in Miriam BUTT andTracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of the LFG04 Conference,pp. 199-208, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, https://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/9/pdfs/lfg04dkk.pdf.
53. Mary DALRYMPLE, Ronald M. KAPLAN, and Tracy Holloway KING (2007), Theabsence of traces: evidence from weak crossover, in Annie ZAENEN, Jane SIMPSON, Tracy Holloway KING, Jane GRIMSHAW, Joan MALING, and Chris MANNING, editors,Architectures, rules, and preferences: variations on themes byJoan W. Bresnan, pp. 85-102, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
54. Mary DALRYMPLE, Ronald M. KAPLAN, and Tracy Holloway KING (2015),Economy of expression as a principle of syntax,Journal of Language Modelling,2(3):377-412, doi:10.15398/jlm.v3i2.82.
55. Mary DALRYMPLE and Tracy Holloway KING (2013), Nested and crosseddependencies and the existence of traces, in Tracy Holloway KING and ValeriaDE PAIVA, editors,From quirky case to representing space: papers in honor of Annie Zaenen, pp. 139-151, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
56. Mary DALRYMPLE, John LAMPING, and Vijay SARASWAT (1993), LFGsemantics via constraints, in Steven KRAUWER, Michael MOORTGAT, and Louis DES TOMBE, editors, Proceedings of the Sixth Conference of the European Chapterof the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL 1993), pp. 97-105,https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/E93-1013.pdf.
57. Mary DALRYMPLE, John J. LOWE, and Louise MYCOCK (2019), The Oxford reference guide to Lexical Functional Grammar, Oxford University Press, Oxford, doi:10.1093/oso/9780198733300.001.0001.
58. Mary DALRYMPLE and Louise MYCOCK (2011), The prosody-semantics interface, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of theLFG11 Conference, pp. 173-193, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/16/papers/lfg11dalrymplemycock.pdf.
59. Mary DALRYMPLE and Irina NIKOLAEVA (2011),Objects and informationstructure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511993473.
60. Jared DESJARDINS (2023), A cross-theoretical and cross-linguistic survey oflexical integrity and the nature of the morphology-syntax interface, unpublished manuscript, University of Colorado at Boulder: https://jared-desjardins.github.io/LI/docs/home/.
61. Anna Maria DI SCIULLO and Edwin WILLIAMS (1987),On the definition of word,number 14 in Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
62. Helge DYVIK, Gyri Smørdal LOSNEGAARD, and Victoria ROSÉN (2019), Multiword expressions in an LFG grammar for Norwegian, in Yannick PARMENTIER and Jakub WASZCZUK, editors, Representation and parsing of multiword expressions: current trends, pp. 69-108, Language Science Press,Berlin, doi:10.5281/zenodo.2579037.
63. Yehuda N. FALK (2001), Lexical-Functional Grammar: an introduction to paralel constraint-based syntax, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
64. Yehuda N. FALK (2010), An unmediated analysis of relative clauses, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Proceedings of the LFG10 Conference, pp. 207-227, CSLI Publications, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/15/papers/lfg10falk.pdf.
65. Charles J. FILLMORE (1985), Syntactic intrusions and the notion of grammatical constructions, in Mary NIEPOKUJ, Mary VANCLAY, Vassiliki NIKIFORIDOU,and Deborah FEDER, editors,Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 73-86, Berkeley Linguistic Society, Berkeley, CA.
66. Charles J. FILLMORE (1987), Varieties of conditional sentences, in Fred MARSHALL, editor, Proceedings of the Third Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL 86): October 10-11, 1986, pp. 163-182, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
67. Charles J. FILLMORE (1988), The mechanisms of ‘Construction Grammar’, inShelley AXMAKER, Annie JAISSER, and Helen SINGMASTER, editors, Proceedingsof the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 35-55, Berkeley Linguistics Society, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.
68. Charles J. FILLMORE, Paul KAY, and Mary Catherine O’CONNOR (1988), Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: the case of let alone, Language, 64(3):501-538, doi:10.2307/414531.
69. Jamie Y. FINDLAY (2016), Mapping theory without argument structure, Journal of Language Modelling, 4(2):293-338, doi:10.15398/jlm.v4i2.171.
70. Jamie Y. FINDLAY (2017), Multiword expressions and lexicalism, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of the LFG17 Conference,pp. 209-229, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/LFG-2017/lfg2017-findlay.pdf.
71. Jamie Y. FINDLAY (2019),Multiword expressions and the lexicon, D.Phil. thesis,University of Oxford, https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:502e8ca5-02f7-4be4-8778-cd89364ba670.
72. Jamie Y. FINDLAY (2020), Mapping Theory and the anatomy of a lexical entry, in Miriam BUTT and Ida TOIVONEN, editors, Proceedings of the LFG20 Conference, pp. 127-147, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA,http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/LFG-2020/lfg2020-findlay.pdf.
73. Jamie Y. FINDLAY (2021), Meaning in LFG, in I. Wayan ARKA, Ash ASUDEH, and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Modular design of grammar: linguistics on theedge, pp. 340-374, Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/oso/9780192844842.003.0020.
74. Jamie Y. FINDLAY (to appear), LFG and Tree-Adjoining Grammar, in MaryDALRYMPLE, editor,The handbook of Lexical Functional Grammar, LanguageScience Press, Berlin.
75. Ingrid FISCHER and Martina KEIL (1996), Parsing decomposable idioms, in Jun-ichi TSUJII, editor,COLING 1996 Volume 1: The 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, pp. 388-393, Association forComputational Linguistics, Copenhagen, https://aclanthology.org/C96-1066.
76. Anette FRANK and Annie ZAENEN (2004), Tense in LFG: syntax andmorphology, in Louisa SADLER and Andrew SPENCER, editors, Projectingmorphology, pp. 23-66, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
77. Bruce FRASER (1970), Idioms within a transformational grammar, Foundationsof Language, 6(1):22-42, https://www.jstor.org/stable/25000426.
78. Gerald GAZDAR, Ewan KLEIN, Geoffrey K. PULLUM, and Ivan A. SAG (1985), Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
79. Jila GHOMESHI, Ray JACKENDOFF, Nicole ROSEN, and Kevin RUSSELL (2004), Contrastive focus reduplication in English (the salad-salad paper),NaturalLanguage & Linguistic Theory, 22(2):307-357, doi:10.1023/B:NALA.0000015789.98638.f9.
80. Jean-Yves GIRARD (1987), Linear logic,Theoretical Computer Science,50(1):1-102, doi:10.1016/0304-3975(87)90045-4.
81. Adele E. GOLDBERG (1995), Constructions: a Construction Grammar approach toargument structure, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
82. Adele E. GOLDBERG (2006), Constructions at work: the nature of generalization in language, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
83. Adele E. GOLDBERG (2013), Argument structure constructions versus lexical rules or derivational verb templates, Mind & Language, 28(4),doi:10.1111/mila.12026.
84. Adele E. GOLDBERG and Ray JACKENDOFF (2004), The English resultative as a family of constructions, Language, 80(3):532-568, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4489722.
85. Morris HALLE and Alec MARANTZ (1993), Distributed Morphology and the pieces of inflection, in Kenneth HALE and Samuel Jay KEYSER, editors, The viewfrom Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, pp. 111-176, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
86. William A. HOWARD (1980), The formulae-as-types notion of construction, in To H. B. Curry: essays on combinatory logic, lambda calculus, and formalism, pp. 479-490, Academic Press, London, circulated in un published form from1969.
87. Ray JACKEDOFF (2008),Construction after construction and its theoretical challenges, Language, 84(1):8-28, doi:10.1353/lan.2008.0058.
88. Ray JACKENDOFF (1977), Xsyntax: a study of phrase structure, number 2 in Linguistic Inquiry Monographs, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
89. Ray JACKENDOFF (1992), Babe Ruth homered his way into the hearts of America, in Tim STOWELL and Eric WEHRLI, editors, Syntax and the lexicon,number 26 in Syntax and Semantics, pp. 155-178, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
90. Aravind K. JOSHI (2005), Tree-adjoining grammars, in Ruslan MITKOV, editor,The Oxford handbook of computational linguistics, pp. 483-498, Oxford UniversityPress, Oxford, first edition, doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199276349.013.0026.
91. Aravind K. JOSHI, Leon S. LEVY, and Masako TAKAHASHI (1975), Tree adjunctgrammars,Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 10(1):136-163,doi:10.1016/S0022-0000(75)80019-5.
92. Aravind K. JOSHI and Yves SCHABES (1997), Tree-Adjoining Grammars, inGrzegorz ROZENBERG and Arto SALOMAA, editors,Handbook of formallanguages, volume 3: beyond words, pp. 69-123, Springer, Berlin.
93. Daniel JURAFSKY (1992),An on-line computational model of human sentence interpretation: a theory of the representation and use of linguistic knowledge, Ph.D. thesis, University of California at Berkeley.
94. Laura KALLMEYER (2010),Parsing beyond context-free grammars, Springer,Heidelberg.
95. Ronald M. KAPLAN and Joan BRESNAN (1982), Lexical-Functional Grammar: a formal system for grammatical representation, in Joan BRESNAN, editor, Themental representation of grammatical relations, pp. 173-281, MIT Press,Cambridge, MA.
96. Ronald M. KAPLAN, John T. MAXWELL, III, and Annie ZAENEN (1987), Functional uncertainty, in CSLI Publications Monthly Newsletter, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
97. Ronald M. KAPLAN and Paula S. NEWMAN (1997), Lexical resource reconciliation in the Xerox Linguistic Environment, in Proceedings of the ACL
98. Workshop on Computational Environments for Grammar Development and Engineering, Association for Computational Linguistics.
99. Paul KAY and Charles J. FILLMORE (1999), Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the What’s X doing Y? construction, Language,75(1):1-33, doi:10.2307/417472.
100. Paul KAY, Ivan A. SAG, and Daniel P. FLICKINGER (2015), A lexical theory of phrasal idioms, unpublished manuscript, CSLI, Stanford: http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~kay/idiom-pdflatex.11-13-15.pdf.
101. Anna KIBORT (2007), Extending the applicability of Lexical Mapping Theory, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Proceedings of the LFG07Conference, pp. 250-270, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA,
102. http://www.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/12/papers/lfg07kibort.pdf.
103. Tracy Holloway KING (1995), Configuring topic and focus in Russian, (Stanford University Dissertations in Linguistics), CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, revisedand corrected version of 1993 Stanford University dissertation.
104. Miltiadis KOKKONIDIS (2008), First-order Glue, Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 17(1):43-68, doi:10.1007/s10849-006-9031-0.
105. George LAKOFF (1987), Women, fire, and dangerous things: what categories revealabout the mind, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
106. Stephen Guy LAPOINTE (1980), A theory of grammatical agreement, Ph.D. thesis,University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
107. Timm LICHTE and Laura KALLMEYER (2016), Same syntax, different semantics: a compositional approach to idiomaticity in multi-word expressions, in Christopher PIÑÓN, editor, Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 11,pp. 111-140, Colloque de Syntaxe et Sémantique à Paris (CSSP), Paris, http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/eiss11/eiss11_lichte-and-kallmeyer.pdf.
108. Timm LICHTE and Laura KALLMEYER (2017), Tree-Adjoining Grammar: atree-based constructionist grammar framework for natural languageunderstanding, inProceedings of the AAAI 2017 Spring Symposium on Computational Construction Grammar and Natural Language Understanding,Technical Report SS-17-02, pp. 205-212, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, https://www.aaai.org/ocs/index.php/SSS/SSS17/paper/viewFile/15330/14536.
109. Rochelle LIEBER and Sergio SCALISE (2007), The Lexical Integrity Hypothesis in a new theoretical universe, in Geert BOOIJ, Luca DUCCESCHI, Bernard FRADIN, Emiliano GUEVARA, Angela RALLI, and Sergio SCALISE, editors, On-line proceedings of the fifth Mediterranean Morphology Meeting (MMM5), pp. 1-24, Università degli Studi di Bologna, Bologna.
110. John J. LOWE (2014), Gluing meanings and semantic structures, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Proceedings of the LFG14 Conference, pp. 387-407, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/19/papers/lfg14lowe.pdf.
111. John J. LOWE (2015), The syntax of Sanskrit compounds,Language,91(3):e71-e115,https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2015.0034.
112. Alec MARANTZ (1997), No escape from syntax: don’t try morphological analysis in the privacy of your own lexicon, in Alexis DIMITRIADIS, Laura SIEGEL, Clarissa SUREK-CLARK, and Alexander WILLIAMS, editors, University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics, volume 4.2: Proceedings of the 21st Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium, pp. 201-225, University of Pennsylvania Department of Linguistics, Philadelphia, PA.
113. Jean-Philippe MARCOTTE (2009), Anti-extraction in Québécois Frenchwh-interrogatives, unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota.
114. Jean-Philippe MARCOTTE and Kateryna KENT (2010), Russian verbal affixes inthe projection architecture, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of the LFG10 Conference, pp. 353-373, CSLI Publications, Stanford,CA, https://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/15/papers/lfg10marcottekent.pdf.
115. Matthew S. MCGLONE, Sam GLUCKSBERG, and Cristina CACCIARI (1994), Semantic productivity and idiom comprehension, Discourse Processes, 17(2):167-190, https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539409544865.
116. Paul B. MELCHIN, Ash ASUDEH, and Dan SIDDIQI (2020), Ojibwe agreement inLexical-Realizational Functional Grammar, in Miriam BUTT and IdaTOIVONEN, editors,Proceedings of the LFG’20 Conference, On-Line, pp. 268-288,CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA,http://cslipublications.stanford.edu/LFG/2020/lfg2020-mas.pdf.
117. Laura A. MICHAELIS (2015), Sign-Based Construction Grammar, in Bernd HEINE and Heiko NARROG, editors, The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (2nd edn.), pp. 147-166, Oxford University Press, Oxford, doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199677078.013.0007.
118. Stefan MÜLLER (2002), Syntax or morphology: German particle verbs revisited,in Nicole DEHÉ, Ray JACKENDOFF, Andrew MCINTYRE, and Silke URBAN,editors,Verb particle explorations, number 1 in Interface exploration,pp. 119-139, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, doi:10.1515/9783110902341.119.
119. Stefan MÜLLER (2006), Phrasal or lexical constructions?,Language,82(4):850-883, doi:10.1353/lan.2006.0213.
120. Stefan MÜLLER (2018), A lexicalist account of argument structure: template-based phrasal LFG approaches and a lexical HPSG alternative, number 2 in Conceptual Foundations of Language Science, Language Science Press, Berlin, doi:10.5281/zenodo.1441351.
121. Stefan MÜLLER (2021), HPSG and Construction Grammar, in Stefan MÜLLER, Anne ABEILLÉ, Robert D. BORSLEY, and Jean-Pierre KOENIG, editors, Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar: the handbook, number 9 in Empirically Oriented Theoretical Morphology and Syntax, pp. 1497-1553, LanguageScience Press, Berlin, doi:10.5281/zenodo.5599882.
122. Stefan MÜLLER and Stephen WECHSLER (2014), Lexical approaches toargument structure,Theoretical Linguistics, 40(1-2):1-76,https://doi.org/10.1515/tl-2014-0001.
123. Louise MYCOCK and John LOWE (2013), The prosodic marking of discoursefunctions, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of theLFG13 Conference, pp. 440-460, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA ,http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/18/papers/lfg13mycocklowe.pdf.
124. Prerna NADATHUR (2013), Weak crossover and the Direct Association Hypothesis, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Proceedings of the LFG13 Conference, pp. 461-481, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/18/papers/lfg13nadathur.pdf.
125. Ryuichi NAKANISHI, Hiroyuki SEKI, and Tadao KASAMI (1992), On the generative capacity of lexical-functional grammars,IEICE Transactions onInformation and Systems, E75-D(4):509-516, https://search.ieice.org/bin/summary.php?id=e75-d_4_509.
126. Rachel NORDLINGER (1998), Constructive case, CSLI Publications. Revisedversion of Stanford University PhD Thesis, Stanford, CA.
127. Geoffrey NUNBERG, Ivan A. SAG, and Thomas WASOW (1994), Idioms,Language, 70(3):491-538, doi:10.1353/lan.1994.0007.
128. Terence PARSONS (1990),Events in the semantics of English: a study in subatomicsemantics, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
129. Barbara PARTEE, Alice TER MEULEN, and Robert E. WALL (1990),Mathematical methods in linguistics, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
130. Adam PRZEPIÓRKOWSKI (2017), A full-fledged hierarchical lexicon in LFG: the Frame Net approach, in Victoria ROSÉN and Koenraad De SMEDT, editors, Thevery model of a modern linguist: in honor of Helge Dyvik, number 8 in Bergen Language and Linguistics Studies, pp. 202-219, University of Bergen, Bergen, doi:10.15845/bells.v8i1.1336.
131. Adam PRZEPIÓRKOWSKI and Anna KUPŚĆ (2006), HPSG for Slavicists,Glossos, 8, https://slaviccenters.duke.edu/projects/glossos-journal/issues/issue-8
132. Geoffrey K. PULLUM and Kyle RAWLINS (2007), Argument or no argument?, Linguistics and Philosophy, 30(2):277-287, doi:10.1007/s10988-007-9013-y.
133. Brian ROARK and Richard SPROAT (2007), Computational approaches tomorphology and syntax, Oxford Surveys in Syntax and Morphology, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
134. Ivan A. SAG (1997), English relative clause constructions, Journal of Linguistics,33(2):431-484, https://www.jstor.org/stable/4176423.
135. Ivan A. SAG (2007), Remarks on locality, in Stefan MÜLLER, editor, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, pp. 394-414, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, doi:10.21248/hpsg.2007.23.
136. Ivan A. SAG (2010), English filler-gap constructions,Language, 86(3):486-545.
137. Ivan A. SAG (2012), Sign-Based Construction Grammar: an informal synopsis,in Hans C. BOAS and Ivan A. SAG, editors, Sign-Based Construction Grammar, number 193 in CSLI Lecture Notes, pp. 69-202, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
138. Ivan A. SAG, Timothy BALDWIN, Francis BOND, Ann COPESTAKE, and Dan FLICKINGER (2002), Multiword expressions: a pain in the neck for NLP, in Alexander GELBUKH, editor, Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing: Third International Conference (CICLing 2002), number 2276 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 1-15, Springer, Berlin, doi:10.1007/3-540-45715-1_1.
139. Manfred SAILER (2000), Combinatorial semantics and idiomatic expressions in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Ph.D. thesis, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.
140. Yves SCHABES, Anne ABEILLÉ, and Aravind K. JOSHI (1988), Parsing strategies with ‘lexicalized’ grammars: application to Tree Adjoining Grammars, in Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), pp. 578-583, Association for Computational Linguistics, doi:10.3115/991719.991757.
141. Stuart M. SHIEBER (1985), Evidence against the context-freeness of natural language, Linguistics and Philosophy, 8(3):333-343, doi:10.1007/978-94-009-3401-6_12.
142. Dorothy C. SIEGEL (1974), Topics in English morphology, Ph.D. thesis, MIT.
143. Jane SIMPSON (1983), Aspects of Warlpiri morphology and syntax, Ph.D. thesis,MIT.
144. Jane SIMPSON (1991), Warlpiri morpho-syntax: a lexicalist approach, KluwerAcademic Publishers, Dordrecht.
145. Liselotte SNIJDERS (2012), Issues concerning constraints on discontinuous NPs in Latin, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors,Proceedings of theLFG12 Conference, pp. 565-581, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA, http://www.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/17/papers/lfg12snijders.pdf.
146. Liselotte SNIJDERS (2015), The nature of configurationality in LFG, Ph.D. thesis,University of Oxford, https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:1310f160-283e-411e-a8d7-20ab4b3380c2.
147. Andrew SPENCER (2005a), Case in Hindi, in Miriam BUTT and Tracy Holloway KING, editors, Proceedings of the LFG05 Conference, pp. 429-446, CSLIPublications, Stanford, CA,https://web.stanford.edu/group/cslipublications/cslipublications/LFG/10/pdfs/lfg05spencer.pdf.
148. Andrew SPENCER (2005b), Word formation and syntax, in Pavol ŠTEKAUERand Rochelle LIEBER, editors, Handbook of word-formation, number 64 in Studiesin Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, pp. 73-97, Springer, Dordrecht.
149. Luc STEELS, editor (2011), Design patterns in Fluid Construction Grammar, number 11 in Constructional Approaches to Language, John Benjamins Publishing Co., Amsterdam, doi:10.1075/cal.11.
150. Luc STEELS and Remi VAN TRIJP (2011), How to make Construction Grammars fluid and robust, in Luc STEELS, editor,Design patterns in Fluid ConstructionGrammar, pp. 301-330, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
151. Steven L. STRAUSS (1982), Lexicalist phonology of English and German, Foris, Dordrecht.
152. Ida TOIVONEN (2002), The directed motion construction in Swedish, Journal ofLinguistics, 38(2):313-345, doi:10.1017/S002222670200141X.
153. Ida TOIVONEN (2003),Non-projecting words: a case study of Swedish particles,Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
154. Michael TOMASELLO (2003), Constructing a language: a usage-based theory of language acquisition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
155. K. VIJAY-SHANKER (1992), Using descriptions of trees in a Tree AdjoiningGrammar,Computational Linguistics, 18(4):481-517, https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=176317.
156. Yang WANG and Tim HUNTER (2023), On regular copying languages, Journalof Language Modelling, 11(1):1--66, doi:10.15398/jlm.v11i1.342, https://jlm.ipipan.waw.pl/index.php/JLM/article/view/342.
157. Jürgen WEDEKIND and Ronald M. KAPLAN (2020), Tractable Lexical-Functional Grammar, Computational Linguistics, 46(3):515-569, doi:10.1162/coli_a_00384.
158. David WEIR (1988), Characterizing mildly context-sensitive grammar formalisms,Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
159. Edwin WILLIAMS (2007), Dumping lexicalism, in Gillian RAMCHAND andCharles REISS, editors,The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, pp. 353-382, Oxford University Press, Oxford, doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199247455.013.0012.
160. Annie ZAENEN (1989), Nominal arguments in Dutch and WYSIWYG LFG, unpublished manuscript, XEROX PARC.

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-c7d58f78-7bd6-4048-add0-e5aa7b64d635