Introduction to Study of Language
Introduction to Study of Language LING 1
Popular in Course
Popular in Linguistics
This 55 page Class Notes was uploaded by Deborah Greenholt on Friday September 4, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to LING 1 at University of California - Los Angeles taught by Staff in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 31 views. For similar materials see /class/177859/ling-1-university-of-california-los-angeles in Linguistics at University of California - Los Angeles.
Reviews for Introduction to Study of Language
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 09/04/15
P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 Introduction to Language Lecture Notes 63 Meaning 1 Truth conditions and Reference 9 Goal We extend to the study of meaning the methodology we applied in earlier lectures to syntax But what is meaning To know the meaning of a sentence the linguist will say is at least to know its truth conditions ie to be able to determine given any situation whether the sentence is true or false in that situation Thus a theory of meaning a semantic theory should at least provide systematic rules for computing the truth conditions of the sentences of the language But how can that be done By giving systematic rules that assign a reference and a truth value to various elements of a syntactic tree We give a very simple example of such a procedure in this lecture We then provide a case study in the analysis of reference the countmass distinction ie the distinction between words like water which i can occur in the singular without a determiner ii cannot be preceded by the determiner a and iii cannot be pluralized and words like chair which have none of properties i iii We discuss the relation between this grammatical distinction and the perceptual difference between solid objects and substances 1 Knowledge of Meaning as Knowledge of Reference and Truth conditions What is meaning The question might be too complex to be tractable But the semanticist observes that in order to know the meaning of a sentences one has at least to know under what conditions the sentence is true ie to know its truth conditions Reducing the question of meaning to the question of truth conditions has proved a very fruitful strategy in contemporary linguistics 11 Syntactic Knowledge vs Semantic Knowledge In earlier Lecture Notes we observed that speakers of English can in principle distinguish between an infinite number of grammatical sentences as in 1 and of ungrammatical sentences as in 2 1 a The rightmost person in the first row is asleep b The person immediately to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep 0 The person behind the person immediately to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep 2 a Rightmost person the in the first row is asleep b The to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep Syntax as we studied it in past lectures had as its goal to discover the rules that allow speakers to make such distinctions However this cannot be the whole story Consider again the grammatical sentences in 1 Speakers know something more about them they know under which conditions each of them is true this is the reason sentences can convey information And just as we saw in syntax that speakers cannot simply have memorized all the sentences that are grammatical there is an infinity of them and speakers are finite creatures it is certain that they have not memorized their truth conditions either for the simple reason that there is an infinity of these as well To see the point more clearly consider the following series of grammatical sentences P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 2 3 a John could swim b John s father could swim c John s father s father could swim d John s father s father could swim e John s father s father s father could swim etc It is clear that no two sentences in this series are true under exactly the same conditions And yet given any situation1 a speaker of English may given enough time and patience determine whether any given sentence in this list is true 12 An Example ofHow it all Works How can the speaker achieve this Providing a systematic answer to this question would lead us far beyond the present course But we can give an idea of the endeavor by first considering a toy grammar one that produces all the sentences in 3 Here it is 4 Syntax A grammar that produces the sentences in 3 IP gtNPI I gtIVP v1D gtvi NP gt PN NPl s N PN gt John N gt father I gt could Vi gt swim It may be noted that this grammar is similar but not quite identical to those that we discussed in earlier lectures The innovation concerns the rule NP gt PN NP1 s N which contains an instance of recursion of NP reminder recursion is the situation that occurs when a node of a given category here NP can be embedded within another node of the same category Thus when the 2nd option offered by the rule is applied we end up with a configuration such as the following where recursion of NP is indicated by circles 1 This is a simplification We need to restrict attention to situations in which there is an individual named John etc P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 Recursion of NP father We can then obtain trees such as the following NP NP y s N father could Vt PN father swim John As we have often done in the past we may recover a simple constituency tree from this phrase structure tree without labels and non branching nodes 3 P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 4 5 s father could swim John 395 father With this background in mind we can now define some semantic rules that will give truth conditions for each of the sentences in 3 The rules have two parts one set of rules determines what expressions such as John John s father etc refer to The other part determines whether a sentence of the form 6 could swim is true where x is any expression Here are the semantic rules in question 6 Semantics Some rules that give the truth conditions of the sentences in 3 These rules are defined for constituency trees i Reference ia John refers to John ib For any expression x x39s father refers to the father of what 6 refers to ii Truth For any expression x 6 could swim is true if and only if what x refers to could swim Let us see how this works in a very simple example Suppose that John s father was Bill and that Bill39s father was Sam According to rule ii Truth John39s father could swim is true just in case what John s father refers to could swim But according to rule ib John s father refers to the father of what John refers to and according to rule ia John refers to John so John s father refers to Bill Hence in the end the sentence is true just in case Bill could swim which is the correct result P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 5 If we wish to apply the rules in 6 to the tree in 5 we need one more step when we compute the reference of the subject John s father s father We already established in the preceding example that John s father refers to Bill Applying rule ib to John39s father s father we can now establish that the latter expression refers to the father of what John s father refers to ie to the father of Bill ie to Sam Hence in the end the sentence John sfatherfsfathe could swim is true just in case Sam could swim It is worth noting that this little procedure which has only three rules can be applied to sentences of arbitrary complexity In fact it suffices to give the truth conditions of all the sentences in 3 Note We can see here that syntactic trees have an advantage that was not discussed in previous lectures they give us a very easy way to define semantic rules rules of semantic interpretation In particular one of the major syntactic constituents NP turns out to also be a major semantic constituent since rule ib which computes the reference is defined for NPs This fact is very general the constituents created by the syntax are the natural units for the computation of reference and truth conditions 2 A Case Study in Reference the Count VIass Distinction In this section we study an important grammatical distinction in the domain of reference We distinguish between count nouns e g book or chair and mass nouns e g water We first establish the grammatical properties of this distinction and then discuss its possible relations to categories of perception Differences between English and Chinese are discussed at the end of these Lecture Notes the entire discussion is largely inspired by Gennaro Chierchia39s Language Thought and Reality after Chomsky39 ms Milan 21 The countmuss distinction in English 0 Count terms e g book are those that are compatible with numeral determiners such as 39two 39three etc They have three related properties a They cannot appear in the singular without a determiner b They may appear in the singular preceded by a39 or every39 0 They may appear in the plural This is illustrated in the following paradigm 7 a John has read book b John has read a book 0 John has read books Other examples table chair car child By contrast mass terms are those that are incompatible with numeral determiners such as 39two39 39three etc They have the opposite properties from count nouns a They can appear in the singular without a determiner b They cannot appear in the singular preceded by a or every39 0 They cannot appear in the plural P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 6 This is illustrated in the following paradigm 8 a John has drunk water b John has drunk a water 0 John has drunk waters Other examples rice hair wine 0 Interestingly the countmass distinction can also be defined by applying the following test 9 Cumulative reference test Put together two samples to which the noun N can be applied Can the noun N be applied to the result Yes gt N is a mass term No gt N is a count term Examples i Put together two samples to which the noun water39 can be applied Can the noun water39 be applied to the result Yes Hence water39 is mass ii Put together two samples to which the noun 39dog can be applied Can the noun 39dog be applied to the result No dogs certainly but not 39dog39 Hence 39dog is count 22 Objects and Substances in Perception Could the countmass distinction be grounded perception This is a plausible hypothesis in view of the following observations which have been made by experimental psychologists in recent years i Babies a few months old have a clear concept of object The following is G Chierchia39s summary of results due to E Spelke quot babies a few months old well before they speak have an articulated theory of the world They believe that solid objects have boundaries and are cohesive ie their parts stick together such objects move as a whole without eg splitting or merging along continuous paths In contrast with this children believe or we should rather say they know that non solid substances like liquids or powders are not as cohesive As they move and contact each other they may not retain their boundedness they may merge or split How can we impute such elaborate view of the world to babies The experimental paradigm that has been used to demonstrate these claims is of the following type Imagine an object say a teddy bear on a table and a screen laying flat in front of the object that slowly rotates upwards covering the teddy bear On one condition the screen raises all the way vertically and precludes the teddy bear from the view This is a normal state of affair the expected condition On a second condition some sort of magic happens from the adult s point of view The screen keeps rotating and as it were goes through the space occupied by the teddy bear the unexpected condition in fact as the screen rotates upwards the teddy bear is removed by the experimenter without the observer being able to see the removal It turns out that children tend to stare longer at events of this sort than at those of the normal expected type Ie they show surprise at abnormal events which in turn suggests that they have the expectation that objects like teddy bears or bottles persist in their location and are solid What is striking is that this happens at three months of age when P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 they cannot possibly have elaborated a theory of solid objects from experience M Hauser has pushed this line of inquiry further showing that in fact primates like rhesus monkeys are endowed with a similar theory of discrete objects vs substances cf Hauser 1996xxquot ii It also appears that the distinction between objects and substances guides children in the acquisition of words As Chierchia writes to summarize results due to Spelke Carey and Soja quotGoing back to children it is highly plausible that such knowledge which children appear to be endowed with at birth guides them as an identification criterion for novel objects vs substances they encounter and later on such a knowledge guides them in acquiring language For example upon encountering a class of solid objects say bottle openers the child identifies some key properties of the objects say shape and function then generalizes it to other objects of the same sort forming the concept of a uniform class of objects bottle openers in general Upon encountering for instance a new paste or a new powder one again identifies some of its key properties in this case it won t be shape but say texture and what one typically does with it then one generalizes such properties to other portions of the same substance Knowing that things are set up in this way ie that they are naturally sorted in substances and objects makes identification and naming easier When language comes in common nouns will naturally fall in two categories accordingly quot Gennaro Chierchia 39Language thought and reality after Chomsky39 draft University of Milan Bicocca To be a bit more specific here is the experiment that Chierchia refers to Soja Carey and Spelke tested 2 year olds who had not mastered the linguistic form of the countmass distinction They were put in a condition in which a a solid object or b a substance was shown to them The experimenter would point to the thing in question and say 39This is my blicket note that the linguistic context does not disambiguate between count and mass here for instance you may say 39this is my chair39 count or 39this is my wine mass The child was then shown two further samples one of which had the same shape but a different taxlwe as the original sample while the other sample had the same taxlwe but a different shape as illustrated below 7 P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 Object Trial Substance Trial Named Stjlnulus quot ggidus w iquot Children generalize on the basis of shape Children generalize on the basis of texture Children overwhelmingly generalized on the basis of shape in the case of solid objects and on the basis of texture in the case of substances Nancy Soja Susan Carey Elizabeth Spelke Ontological categories guide young children s inductions of word meaning Object terms and substance terms Cognition 38 1991 179 211 23 Does the countmuss distinction re ect categories of perception From this one might be tempted to conclude that the countmass distinction simply re ects categories of perception count nouns refer to solid objects while mass nouns refer to substances However such a theory has serious flaws i First the countmass distinction applies to nouns that refer to abstract notions which are not perceived to begin with Here are some examples 10 a generosity mass vs virtues count b knowledge mass vs beliefs count 0 pride mass vs prejudice count d fun mass vs joy count ii Second it is possible to find pairs of a count and of a mass noun which apparently refer to exactly the same thing 8 P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 9 11 a footwear mass vs shoes count b change mass vs coins count iii Third different languages sometimes classify the same thing differently Thus the closest translation of hair39 which is mass in English is count in French cheveu39 or Italian capello39 Unless one wants to espouse a radical form of linguistic determinism it is plausible that French and English speakers still perceive hair in the same way A final consideration comes from recent studies of aphasia One patient was found who had deficits that specifically targeted the countmass distinction 39Semenza Mondini and Cappelletti 19xx describe the case of EA a 73 years old housewife speaker of a standard variety of Italian who suffered from a vascular lesion in the left temporal region of her brain Before her illness she was working in her husband s business partly in accounting partly in public relations and she had no record of linguistic abnormalities After the onset of her condition she suffered from aphasia from which she had since mostly recovered retaining only what looked like a mild type of anomia a difficulty in retrieving and using nouns Upon closer scrutiny in tasks involving various noun types it emerged that she had a specific impairment in the use of mass nouns One of the tasks on which she was tested for example involved detecting grammatical errors with mass vs count nouns She was asked to correct sentences like there is much desk in the classroom vs there is a sand on the beach She had no problem in detecting the problem with sentences of the first type and in correcting it appropriately there are many desks in the classroom But she had severe difficulties in detecting and correcting the problem in the second kind of sentence involving mass nouns This difficulty persisted across other types of tasks For example she was asked to produce sentences using pairs like shipsea vs rollbutter With the first pair she would produce perfectly grammatical sentences in the sea there are many ships with pairs of the second type she had a remarkably high error rate I spread a butter on a roll The problem affected the whole range of mass nouns from the most canonical and frequent like water to the less frequent ones of the collective sort like furniture All in all FA seemed to have a serious impairment circumscribed to the grammar of mass noun while having a normal performance in other linguistic and non linguistic tasks Semenza et al also report finding the opposite dissociation ie severely agrammatic patients who perform like normal patients on tasks involving mass noun like those used in studying FA What does this tell us on the nature of the masscount distinction If such a distinction is the manifestation of some capacity not specific to language the case of EA is very hard to make sense of For one would expect that such a patient should display some kind of independent cognitive deficit detectable in non specifically linguistic tasks For example there should be a difficulty in distinguishing say liquids and substances from discrete objects in general Or there should be some other problem in the communicative abilities of the patient But according to Semenza et al this was not the case If on the other hand the masscount distinction is a specific feature of the architecture of grammar which is realized in our brains then it is conceivable that such a feature may be somehow damaged in relative isolation while leaving relatively intact the rest of our capacities Gennaro Chierchia Language thought and reality after Chomsky39 draft University of Milan Bicocca P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 10 24 A Hypothesis Mass nouns are intrinsically plural The foregoing considerations suggest that the countmass distinction is a specific feature of grammar But can we explain the behavior of mass nouns relative to count nouns or do we have to take the contrasts we saw between 7 book and 8 water to be primitives of our theory Interestingly these contrasts can be explained if mass nouns are taken to be intrinsically plural The idea is that water is understood as something like the parts of water ie as something like a plural Of course there still has to be some difference between plural count nouns and mass nouns Some linguists eg Chierchia op cit have suggested that count nouns whether singular or plural give information about what the elementary atomic39 parts are whereas mass nouns don39t in fact information about the elementary parts is necessary in order to count things Thus mass nouns are intrinsically plural but they do not provide information about the elementary parts ie they do not care39 what the elementary parts are by contrast book or books come equipped with information about what the individual books are no such information is provided by water As a result whenever we cannot find any elementary parts as is the case with substances we naturally use a mass term The word learning experiment that was reported above shows that children know this ie when they cannot find any elementary parts as is the case with a substance they treat the word that refers to it as mass not count How does the hypothesis that mass nouns are intrinsically plural account for the contrast between 7 and 8 The crucial observation is that plurals behave exactly like mass nouns i The may appear without a determiner ii They may not appear with the determiner a39 or every39 iii They may not take an additional plural marker 12 a John has read books b John has read a books 0 John has read books s If we put together the facts of 7 8 and 12 we obtain a particularly clear picture in which singular count nouns behave in one way and mass nouns and plural count nouns behave in another way In this fashion the behavior of mass nouns can be taken to have been explained at least in part Singular Count Nouns John has read book John has read a book John has read books Plural Count Nouns John has read books John has read a books Johns has read books s Mass Nouns John has drunk water John has drunk a water John has drunk waters 25 The CountMass Distinction in Chinese 0 There are interesting differences among the world s languages in the treatment of the countmass distinction In Chinese every noun is mass This immediately raises a question how do Chinese speakers talk about numbers of things In the same way as English speakers count heads of cattle ie by having a measure word head come before 39cattle to specify what is the unit into which the reference of cattle is to be divided This is possible even though cattle is a mass term as shown by the following tests P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 Introduction to Language Lecture Notes 73 Meaning III Implicatures 9 Goal When a professor writes in a letter of recommendation Mr Smith has a beautiful handwriting and is neatly dressed we understand that Smith is probably a bad student Is this an entailment of the professor s sentence No Applying the test we developed in the previous lecture we see that the following does not hold In every conceivable situation in which it is true that Mr Smith has a beautiful handwriting and is neatly dressed it is true that Smith is a bad student to see that this does not hold just imagine that Smith is a genius who happens to have a beautiful handwriting and to be neatly dressed Note by contrast that if the professor wrote Mr Smith is absolutely terrible at everything he does including his studies it is now an entailment of the sentence that Smith is a bad student the above test can establish this The British philosopher Paul Grice coined the term implicature to refer to those inferences that are made not on the basis of the content expressed but by virtue of the fact that a speaker trying to make communication as effective as possible chose to utter such a content in these particular circumstances In the above example we infer that Smith is a bad student because we know that the letter of recommendation should mention the most positive things that can be said about Smith If the most positive thing is that Smith has a beautiful handwriting and is neatly dressed we can infer that his academic performance is abysmal Because implicatures are inferences based on certain assumptionsabout what the speaker is trying to achieve rather than just on the content of what is said they can easily be removed or cancelled Thus I may say without contradiction Mr Smith has a beautiful handwriting and is neatly dressed But these are only the least important of his qualities He turns out to be a truly excellent student The implicature that Smith is a bad student has been cancelled by the end of the discourse By contrast entailments cannot be cancelled if I write Mr Smith is absolutely terrible at everything he does including his studies However he is a truly excellent student my statement simply sounds contradictory In the second part of these Lecture Notes we focus on a particular variety of implicatures called scalar implicatures If I say John or Mary made a mistake it is typically understood that either only John or only Mary made a mistake but not both However this is not an entailment of the sentence Why not Because this inference can be cancelled for instance by adding In fact both of them did We will suggest that John or Mary really means John or Mary or both inclusive disjunction However we often get the impression that the speaker meant John or Mary but not both exclusive negation Why Because if the speaker had known that both John and Mary made a mistake he could have said something more informative namely John and Mary made a mistake We normally assume that the speaker is trying to make communication as effective as possible Thus if he did not choose the more informative statement chances are that this was because it was false Hence we infer that it probably wasn t the case that both John and Mary came Since John and Mary came is strictly more informative than John or Mary came we call the pair ltor andgt a scale The above reasoning can then be summarized as follows i The speaker used the least informative member of the scale or meaning or or both ii If the more informative sentence with and instead of or had been true it would have been more effective to utter it rather than the sentence the speaker in fact uttered iii Since the speaker did not make that choice it is likely that this was because the more informative sentence with and was false hence we add to or the inference but not and which accounts for the impression that or is exclusive P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 2 1 Implicatures Consider the following letter of recommendation from The Language Files modified from the philosopher Paul Grice 1 Dear Colleague Mr John Smith has asked me to write a letter on his behalf Mr Smith is unfailingly polite is neatly dressed at all times and is always on time for his classes Sincerely yours Harry H Homer It is unlikely that Smith will obtain the position he is applying for Why not Because the addressee of the letter has inferred that Smith is a bad student Could this be because the content of Homer s letter entailed that Smith is not a good student No for two reasons a first the following does not seem to hold In every conceivable situation in which it is true that Smith is unfailingly polite is neatly dressed at all times and is always on time for his classes it is true that Smith is a bad student b second the following is no contradiction Mr Smith is unfailingly polite is neatly dressed at all times and is always on time for his classes But these are only his most super cial qualities Mr Smith is definitely a good student even an excellent one But a sentence which is followed by the negation of a sentence it entails yields a contradiction e g John is a good student and he isn39t a student is a contradiction because John is a good student entails John is a student Thus if Smith is not a good student39 were an entailment of what is said in the letter Homer s statement could not be followed by 39Smith is a good student39 without yielding a contradiction But the above discourse is certainly not contradictory hence 39Smith is not a good student39 is not entailed by Homer39s statement What is going then Here is a plausible analysis essentially due to the British philosopher Paul Grice i In a letter of recommendation the professor is normally supposed to mention the most positive features of the student ii Homer only mentioned that Smith is polite neatly dressed and always on time iii Therefore these are probably his most positive qualities and therefore he is probably a bad student Crucially the fact that Smith is a bad student is not part of what is said but it is inferred from a reasoning based on a what was said and b what a speaker or in this case a writer who tries to communicate as effectively as possible is expected to do given the circumstances More generally Grice coined the term implicature to refer to those inferences that are made not just on the basis of the content expressed but by virtue of the fact that a speaker trying to make communication as effective as possible chose to utter such a content in those circumstances P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 3 Because implicatures are derived on the basis of assumptions about the speaker which might turn out to be wrong implicatures can be easily removed or cancelled This explains why the following discourse could in fact be coherent Mr Smith is unfailingly polite is neatly dressed at all times and is always on time for his classes But these are only his most super cial qualities Mr Smith is de nitely a good student even an excellent one Although the first two sentences implicate that Smith is not a good student the third sentence cancels this implicature Further examples of implicatures are given below 2 Utterance Can you pass the salt Implicature I want you to pass the salt Reasoning it is not considered polite to say 39I want you to pass the salt understood literally can you pass the salt would not be a particularly relevant question to ask chances are that I meant something else namely that I would like you to pass the salt 3 As utterance Smith doesn39t seem to have a girlfriend these days B s utterance He has been paying a lot of visits to New York lately B s implicature Smith has a girlfriend in New York Reasoning B s answer is irrelevant unless it contributes information related to As question Chances are that B uttered the second sentence because the reason that A often goes to New York is that he has a girlfriend there To recapitulate let us see what are the differences between entailments and implicatures Difference 1 Entailments follow from what is said Implicatures do not An implicature is derived on the basis of what is said together with some assumptions about what the speaker is trying to achieve Difference 2 Entailments satisfy the test given in earlier Lecture Notes reprinted below Implicatures generally don t 4 To check whether p entails q check whether In every conceivable situation in which it is true that p it is true that q Difference 3 Implicatures can be cancelled Entailments cannot be This follows from the first difference because the assumptions on which the derivation of the implicature is based might turn out to be wrong P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 4 2 Scalar Implicatures In this section we study in greater detail a particular sort of implicatures called scalar implicatures 21 What scalar implicatures are If I say John or Mary made a mistake it is typically understood that either only John or only Mary made a mistake but not both Here we concentrate on the not both part Given what we have studied so far it could either be an entailment or an implicature Is it an entailment No a First the following does not hold In every conceivable situation in which it is true that John or Mary made a mistake it is true that not both of them did b Second if not both of them made a mistake were entailed by John or Mary made a mistake it would be a contradiction to say John or Mary made a mistake In fact both of them did But this sentence is not a contradiction Hence not both of them made a mistake is not entailed by the original sentence All this suggests that not both of them made a mistake is in fact an implicature of the original utterance What is the reasoning on the basis of which this implicature is derived Here is a plausible story If the speaker had known that both John and Mary had made a mistake he could have said something more informative than John or Mary made a mistake namely John and Mary made a mistake We normally assume that the speaker is trying to make communication as effective as possible Thus if he did not choose the more informative statement chances are that this was because it was false Hence we infer that it probably wasn t the case that both John and Mary came Since John and Mary made a mistake is strictly more informative than John or Mary made a mistake where or means or or both we call the pair ltor andgt a scale The above reasoning can then be summarized as follows i The speaker used the least informative member of the scale or ii If the more informative sentence with and instead of or had been true it would have been more effective to utter it rather than the sentence the speaker in fact uttered iii But the speaker did not make that choice Therefore the more informative sentence with and was probably false This explains why John or Mary made a mistake normally implicates not both of them did This reasoning can be applied to a variety of other scales Note that the scale may include more than two terms The implicature is always of the form It is not the case that where is the original sentence with its scalar term replaced by a stronger scalar term P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 5 5 The quantifier scale some lt most lt every a Some student came to the party implicates It39s not the case that most students came to the party replacing some with the stronger term most It39s not the case that every student came to the party replacing some with the stronger term every b Most students came to the party implicates It39s not the case that every student came to the party replacing most with the stronger term every Note There are many other scales for instance lttwo three four gt where 39two is analyzed as at least two39 three is analyzed as at least three39 etc The reader can check that under this analysis 39Three students came to the party is more informative than Two students came to the party39 22 What children know about scalar implicatures Recent experiments discussed in class but not reported here suggest that young children do not always compute the scalar implicatures that adults do It is a topic of current research to understand why this is so The rest of these Lecture Notes is optional though highly recommended 23 Scalar implicatures systematically disappear in down wardentailing environments In certain environments scalar implicatures systematically disappear the following examples are from S Crain 6 a Lucy does not like Snoopy or Charlie b Lucy will never in a million years like Snoopy or Charlie c No one will like Snoopy or Charlie d Every student who likes Snoopy or Charlie will enjoy the class In none of these examples are we tempted to interpret Paul or Bill as Paul or Bill but not both Why is this First we note an interesting correlation The environments in which scalar implicatures systematically disappear are precisely those in which negative polarity items are licensed 7 a Lucy will not like Snoopy at all b Lucy will never in a million years like Snoopy at all e No one will like Snoopy at all d Every student who likes Snoopy at all will enjoy the class 1 Of course in other environments implicatures may be cancelled since implicatures can always be cancelled But the point is that in the sentences in 6 39Snoopy or Charlie39 is never interpreted as 39Snoopy or Charlie but not both39 P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2004 Introduction to the Study of Language Lecture Notes 0 Rules of Language Description vs Prescription It Goal To know a language is to have in principle the ability to utter and understand infinitely many new sentences How is this possible The key is that speakers know a finite number of rules which can be applied repeatedly to produce an infinite number of sentences All spoken language is in this sense governed by rules in this respect there is no di erence between what is considered good English and what is considered 39bad English39 they each follow rules though they may be different ones We will distinguish two uses of the notion of rule for prescriptive and for descriptive purposes Prescriptive rules are intended to teach people how they should speak or write according to some predetermined arbitrary standard They are of dubious origin have no linguistic justification and have no relevance for the linguist who is solely interested in describing and understanding the rules that speakers do in fact follow 1 The Miracle of Language 39In nite Use of Finite Means39 11 Any speaker can in principle construct an in nite number of sentences There is no limit to the complexity of the sentences that we may in principle utter or understand 1 a John is asleep b The President is asleep 0 The chairman of the Linguistics Department is asleep 2 a The rightmost person in the first row is asleep b The person immediately to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep 0 The person behind the person immediately to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep 3 a John is asleep b Mary noticed that John is asleep 0 Nobody cares that Mary noticed that John is asleep d Sam knows that nobody cares that Mary noticed that John is asleep Note that if we modify the order of words in any of these sentences or omit some of the words we typically obtain sentences that are 39odd or sound weird39 For this reason they will henceforth be preceded by a star As we will see the fact that a sentence is 39odd39 or sounds weird indicates that a rule of the language has been violated 4 a asleep is John b President the is asleep 5 Rightmost person the in the first row is asleep p m The to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2004 2 12 Speakers know a nite number of rules The puzzle then is this how can human beings who are finite creatures have knowledge of an in nite number of sentences The answer is because they know rules which they may apply repeatedly to form any number of new sentences In this respect our knowledge of language is similar to our knowledge of integers In principle there is no limit to the number of even integers that you may enumerate 2 4 6 8 etc In this sense you know an infinite number of even integers But of course you did not memorize them all You know a rule that allows you to produce 39new39 even integers from old ones In this case the rule is for any even integer E E2 is another even integer What is the longest sentence of English Answer there is none For any sentence that you care to choose you may construct a longer sentence by embedding it under 39Nobody cares that Examples 6 a John is asleep Nobody cares that John is asleep b Mary noticed that John is asleep Nobody cares that Mary noticed that John is asleep This is our first example of a rule of English A simple rule If S is a sentence of English Nobody cares that S is a sentence of English Of course as stated this rule is very crude but it does give us an idea of how we may have knowledge of a potentially infinite number of sentences Notice that this rule can be iterated any number of times to produce an arbitrary number of new sentences 7 a John is asleep b Nobody cares that John is asleep 0 Nobody cares that nobody cares that John is asleep d Nobody cares that nobody cares that nobody cares that John is asleep e etc Note that if all you have memorized is a the sentence John is asleep and b the simple rule described above you will still be able to produce a potentially infinite number of sentences simply by repeating the procedure whose results are illustrated in 7 P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2004 3 2 Prescription vs Description When we speak of rules of grammar we often mean prescriptive rules ie rules that are intended to tell people how they should speak or write according to some preestablished arbitrary standard Prescriptive rules are of dubious origin and have no linguistic justification The linguist is solely interested in understanding descriptive rules ie rules that govern the way in which people actually do speak Every spoken language is governed by rules in this sense This does not mean that every speaker of English follows exactly the same rules English has a number different dialects which are equally valuable but are nonetheless distinct 21 Some Prescriptive Rules of English C Phillips University ofMaryland 9 Examples 8 Don t split infinitives a Do not say I wanted to carefully explain to her why the decision was made b Say I wanted to explain to her carefully why the decision was made 9 Don t use double negation a Do not say I didn t do nothing b Say I didn39t do anything 10 Don t end a sentence with a preposition a Do not say A preposition is not a good word to end a sentence with b Say A preposition is not a good word with which to end a sentence 11 Don t use who in place of whom a Do not say Who did you talk to b Say Whom did you talk to Some of these rules stem from an attempt to make English look like Latin Thus in Latin an infinitive being a single word could never be split But of course from this it does not follow that the same should hold of English where 39to explain is made of two words not one In any event the linguist as a scientist has nothing to say about prescription We will attempt to describe and understand the rules that speakers do in fact follow we are interested in how people speak not in how they should speak Accordingly we distinguish between descriptive grammar and prescriptive grammar Descriptive grammar has as its goal to describe what the native speakers of a language do verbally when they speak their language the meaning of the word grammar as used in this course all all 139 Prescriptive grammar categorizes certain language uses as to a J 1 standard form of the language the meaning of grammar normally intended in English classes An example Use of slow vs slowly and similar pairs of adjectives vs adverbs adjective form here refers to the word without ly adverb form refers to the word with ly P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2004 4 Descriptive rule Prescriptive rule There is a certain overlap between the adjective and Use as an adjective a word which qualifies a noun Use as an adverb a adverb classes eg the adjective form slow may be word which qualifies as a verb Greever amp Jones The Century used as either adjective or adverb However when Collegiate Handbook 1924 the adjective form is used as an adverb it must follow the verb only the adverb form is allowed preceding a verb Adapted from Quirk et al A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language 1985 You drive too slow conforms to descriptive account but violates prescriptive rule You drive too slowly conforms to both descriptive and prescriptive accounts He slowly negotiated the curves conforms to both descriptive and prescriptive accounts He slow negotiated the curves violates to both descriptive and prescriptive accounts O Relativity of Prescriptive Rules What is considered grammatically proper depends on historical circumstances that have nothing to do with purely linguistic or logical considerations For instance in contemporary French double negation is considered to be proper39 while single negation is considered sloppy39 the opposite pattern from the one we find in English 12 Contemporary French a 11 He mange rien Prestige Dialect He NOT eats nothing He doesn t eat anything39 b 11 mange rien Spoken Language He eats nothing He doesn39t eat anything39 Double negation39 or 39negative agreement39 also called 39negative concord is a feature of African American Vernacular English as well as other varieties of English 22 All spoken language is governed by rules What is considered sloppy speech turns out to be governed by systematic rules Here is one extreme example a highly improper term which in slang can be inserted inside words apparently in an arbitrary fashion 9 Example 1 fuckin insertion 13 a fan fuckin tastic b abso fucking lutely c Phila fuckin delphia d Kalama fuckin zoo e Pennsyl fuckin vania P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2004 5 As it turns out the process is systematic as witnessed by the fact that an odd result is obtained when the term in question is inserted in different positions 14 a fanta fuckin stic b absolute fuckin ly c Kala fuckin mazoo d Penn fuckin sylvania In fact there is a systematic rule underlying the insertion of this term as a first approximation it may only be inserted right before a stressed syllable represented in bold below 15 a fanTAstic 9 fan fuckin tastic b absoLUTEly 9 abso fucking lutely c PhilaDELphia 9 Phila fuckin delphia Descriptive Rule 39fuckin can be inserted only before a stressed syllable 9 Example 2 missing be39 in African American Vernacular English AAVE also called Black English Vernacular W Labov 39The Case of the Missing Copula39 in Gleitrnan amp Liberman eds Language 1993 Note The examples described below are by no means illustrative of the speech of all African Americans just of one dialect among others these examples are reproduces because they were the object of an influential study by the sociolinguist Willian Labov 16 a She the first one started us off Dolly R 35 b He fast in everything he do M 16 c Michael Washington out here selli his rocks F 14 East Palo Alto 17 a Boot always comin39 over my house to eat to ax for food M 10 South Harlem b He just feel like he gettin39 cripple up from arthritis F 48 North Carolina 0 Y39all got her started now she fixin39 to give y39all a lecture F 14 East Palo Alto Hypothesis 1 Be can be freely omitted in African American English Hypothesis 2 Be is not omitted in African American English but it is phonologically reduced a more extreme form of the phenomenon found in standard varieties of English John is nice 9 J ohn39s nice Argument against Hypothesis 1 In some contexts be cannot be omitted in AAVE P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 Introduction to the Study of Language Lecture Notes 1A Rules of Language Description vs Prescription Last update 010906 I1 Goal To know a language is to have in principle the ability to utter and understand infinitely many new sentences How is this possible The key is that speakers know a finite number of rules which can be applied repeatedly to produce an infinite number of sentences All spoken language is in this sense governed by rules in this respect there is no di erence between what is considered 39good English and what is considered 39bad English they each follow rules though they may be different ones We will distinguish two uses of the notion of rule for prescriptive vs for descriptive purposes Prescriptive rules are intended to teach people how they should speak or write according to some predetermined arbitrary standard They are of dubious origin have no linguistic justification and have no relevance for the linguist who is solely interested in describing and understanding the rules that speakers do in fact follow descriptive rules 1 The Miracle of Language 39In nite Use of Finite Means39 11 Any speaker can in principle construct an in nite number of sentences There is no limit to the complexity of the sentences that we may in principle utter or understand 1 a John is asleep b The President is asleep 0 The chairman of the Linguistics Department is asleep 2 a The rightmost person in the first row is asleep b The person immediately to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep 0 The person behind the person immediately to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep 3 a John is asleep b Mary noticed that John is asleep 0 Nobody cares that Mary noticed that John is asleep d Sam knows that nobody cares that Mary noticed that John is asleep Note that if we modify the order of words in any of these sentences or omit some of the words we typically obtain sentences that are 39odd or 39soqu weird39 For this reason they will henceforth be preceded by a star As we will see the fact that a sentence is 39odd or 39sounds weird indicates that a rule of the language has been violated 4 a asleep is John b President the is asleep 5 a Rightmost person the in the first row is asleep b The to the left of the rightmost person in the first row is asleep P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 2 12 Speakers know a finite number of rules The puzzle then is this how can human beings who are nite creatures have knowledge of an in nite number of sentences The answer is because they know rules which they may apply repeatedly to form any number of new sentences In this respect our knowledge of language is similar to our knowledge of integers In principle there is no limit to the number of even integers that you may enumerate 2 4 6 8 etc In this sense you know an infinite number of even integers But of course you did not memorize them all You know a rule that allows you to produce 39new even integers from old ones In this case the rule is for any even integer E E2 is another even integer What is the longest sentence of English Answer there is none For any sentence that you care to choose you may construct a longer sentence by embedding it under 39Nobody cares that Examples 6 a John is asleep Nobody cares that John is asleep b Mary noticed that John is asleep Nobody cares that Mary noticed that John is asleep This is our first example of a rule of English A simple rule If S is a sentence of English Nobody cares that S is a sentence of English Of course as stated this rule is very crude but it does give us an idea of how we may have knowledge of a potentially infinite number of sentences Notice that this rule can be iterated repeated any number of times to produce an arbitrary number of new sentences 7 a John is asleep b Nobody cares that John is asleep 0 Nobody cares that nobody cares that John is asleep d Nobody cares that nobody cares that nobody cares that John is asleep e etc Note that if all you have memorized is a the sentence 39John is asleep and b the simple rule described above you will still be able to produce a potentially infinite number of sentences simply by repeating the procedure whose results are illustrated in 7 P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 3 2 Prescription vs Description When we speak of rules of grammar we often mean prescriptive rules ie rules that are intended to tell people how they should speak or write according to some preestablished arbitrary standard Prescriptive rules are of dubious origin and have no linguistic justification The linguist is solely interested in understanding descriptive rules ie rules that govern the way in which people actually do speak Every spoken language is governed by rules in this sense This does not mean that every speaker of English follows exactly the same rules English has a number different dialects which are equally valuable but are nonetheless distinct 21 Some Prescriptive Rules of English C Phillips University ofMaryland 9 Examples 8 Don t split infinitives a Do not say I wanted to carefully explain to her why the decision was made b Say I wanted to explain to her carefully why the decision was made 9 Don t use double negation a Do not say I didn39t do nothing b Say I didn39t do anything 10 Don t end a sentence with a preposition a Do not say A preposition is not a good word to end a sentence with b Say A preposition is not a good word with which to end a sentence 11 Don t use who in place of whom a Do not say Who did you talk to b Say Whom did you talk to Some of these rules stem from an attempt to make English look like Latin Thus in Latin an infinitive being a single word could never be split But of course from this it does not follow that the same should hold of English where 39to explain is made of two words not one In any event the linguist as a scientist has nothing to say about prescription We will attempt to describe and understand the rules that speakers do in fact follow we are interested in how people speak not in how they should speak Accordingly we distinguish between descriptive grammar and prescriptive grammar Descriptive grammar has as its goal to describe what the native speakers of a language do verbally when they speak their language the meaning of the word grammar as used in this course Prescriptive grammar categorizes certain language uses as J39 to a standard form of the language the meaning of grammar normally intended in English classes P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 4 An example Use of slow vs slowly and similar pairs of adjectives vs adverbs adjective form here refers to the word without ly adverb form refers to the word with ly Descriptive rule Prescriptive rule There is a certain overlap between the adjective and Use as an adjective a word which qualifies a noun Use as an adverb a adverb classes eg the adjective form slow may be word which qualifies a verb Greever amp Jones The Century Colleg39mte used as either adjective or adverb However when Handbook 1924 the adjective form is used as an adverb it must follow the verb only the adverb form is allowed preceding a verb Adapted from Quirk et al A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language 1985 You drive too slow conforms to descriptive account but violates prescriptive rule You drive too slowly conforms to both descriptive and prescriptive accounts He slowly negotiated the curves conforms to both descriptive and prescriptive accounts He slow negotiated the curves violates to both descriptive and prescriptive accounts O Relativity of Prescriptive Rules What is considered grammatically proper depends on historical circumstances that have nothing to do with purely linguistic or logical considerations For instance in contemporary French double negation is considered to be 39proper39 while single negation is considered sloppy39 the opposite pattern from the one we find in English 12 Contemporary French a II He mange rien Prestige Dialect He NOT eats nothing He doesn t eat anything39 b 11 mange rien Spoken Language He eats nothing He doesn39t eat anything39 Double negation39 or 39negative agreement39 also called 39negative concord is a feature of BEV Black English Vernacular as well as other varieties of English 22 All spoken language is governed by rules What is considered sloppy speech turns out to be governed by systematic rules Here is one extreme example a highly improper term which in slang can be inserted inside words apparently in an arbitrary fashion 9 Example 1 fuckin insertion 13 a fan fuckin tastic b abso fucking lutely c Phila fuckin delphia d Kalama fuckin zoo e Pennsyl fuckin vania P Schlenker 7 Ling I 7 Introduction to the Study of Language UCLA Winter 2006 5 As it turns out the process is systematic as witnessed by the fact that an odd result is obtained when the term in question is inserted in different positions 14 a fanta fuckin stic b absolute fuckin ly c Kala fuckin mazoo d Penn fuckin sylvania In fact there is a systematic rule underlying the insertion of this term as a rst approximation it may only be inserted right before a stressed syllable represented in bold below 15 a fanTAstic 9 fan fuckin tastic b absoLUTEly 9 abso fucking lutely c PhilaDELphia 9 Phila fuckin delphia Descriptive Rule 39fuckin can be inserted only before a stressed syllable 9 Example 2 missing be39 in Black English Vernacular BEV you will also encounter the term African American English Vernacular39 or AAEV W Labov 39The Case of the Missing Copula39 in Gleitrnan amp Liberman eds Language 1995 Note The examples described below are by no means illustrative of the speech of all African Americans just of one dialect among others these examples are reproduced because they were the object of an influential study by the sociolinguist Willian Labov 16 a She the first one started us off Dolly R 35 b He fast in everything he do M 16 c Michael Washington out here selli his rocks F 14 East Palo Alto 17 a Boot always comin39 over my house to eat to ax for food M 10 South Harlem b He just feel like he gettin39 cripple up from arthritis F 48 North Carolina 0 Y39all got her started now she fixin39 to give y39all a lecture F 14 East Palo Alto We now consider two hypotheses about these data Hypothesis 1 Be can be freely omitted in BEV Hypothesis 2 Be is not omitted in BEV but it is phonologically reduced a more extreme form of the phenomenon found in standard varieties of English John is nice 9 J ohn39s nice Introductory Linguistics A draft textbook by Bruce P Hayes University of California Los Angeles Copyright 2008 by Bruce P Hayes This copyrighted draft textbook may be freely read by anyone It may be used by any linguistics teacher for teaching purposes under the condition that you notify the author by email bhayeshumnetuclaedu that you are using it Comments and corrections are most welcome The current draft is the rst version that takes the form of a book rather than lecturebylecture readings and some of its former status will be apparent All of the Study Exercises have answers but you may have to hunt a bit to nd them Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 2 Contents Chapter 1 What is Linguistics Chapter 2 Morphology Chapter 3 Normative views of language Chapter 4 Syntax I 7 Phrase Structure Chapter 5 Syntax II 7 Transformations Chapter 6 Syntax III 7 39 i ation and Wh Chapter 7 Language Acquisition Chapter 8 Review of Morphology and Syntax Chapter 9 Semantics Chapter 10 Phonetics Chapter 11 Phonology I 7 Phonemic Analysis Chapter 12 Phonology II 7 Optional Rules Phonology Morphology Interaction Chapter 13 Historical Linguistics Chapter 14 Applications and Outlook Chapter 15 More review problems Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 3 Chapter 1 What is Linguistics 1 What this book will be like Linguistics is the science of language it studies the structure of human languages and aims to develop a general theory of how languages work The eld is surprisingly technical to describe languages in detail requires a fair amount of formal notation A good parallel would be the eld of symbolic logic which uses a formal notation to understand the processes of reasoning and argumentation There are basically three things I hope you will get out of this book First there is the subject matter itself which is useful to know for people many different elds such as J quot Y J l l g and r quot The course is also an introduction to linguistics for those who are going to major in it Second the course involves some mental exercise involving analysis of data from English and other languages I doubt that anyone who doesn t go on in linguistics will remember much of the course material ve years after they have graduated but the analytical skills you will get practice in will be I hope both more permanent and more useful Third the course is intended to give a more realistic view of science and how it proceeds The reason we can do this in linguistics is that it is a fairly primitive science without an enormous body of wellestablished results Because of this we are less interested in teaching you a body of established knowledge rather our focus is on teaching you to decide what is right on your own by looking at the data All sciences are in this state of uncertainty at their frontiers linguistics can give you a more authentically scienti c experience in a beginning course 2 Implicit and explicit knowledge of language Linguists are constantly asked the question How many languages do you speak This question is a little irritating because it is largely irrelevant to what linguists are trying to do The goals of linguistics are to describe and understand the structure of human languages to discover the ways in which all languages are alike and the ways in which they may differ The point is that even if one could speak all 8000 or so of the world s languages one would not have solved all the problems of linguistics The reason is this speaking a language and knowing its structure are two very different things In speaking a language one uses thousands of grammatical rules without being aware of them they are unconscious knowledge Linguists attempt to make explicit this unconscious knowledge by looking closely at the data of language That is they attempt to make the implicit knowledge of native speakers into explicit knowledge What follows are two examples intended to persuade you that as a speaker of English you possess grammatical knowledge of which you are not consciously aware Haves I ntroductarv Linguistics 1 4 3 The reference of each other Consider the following facts In 1 each other refers to we in 2 it refers to John and Bill and 3 is a bizarre sentence in that each other cannot logically refer to I 1 We like each other 2 John and Bill like each other 3 I like each other Following standard practice I will place an asterisk before sentences that are ungrammatical ie that are not English In 3 the ungrammaticality can be traced to the absence of any plausible interpretation for the sentence since each other describes actions like this X Y X X Y it cannot be used unless the agent of the action is plural But not all cases can be explained in this way In 4 you can think of a meaning that the sentence could in principle have but this meaning is not allowed by the rules of English grammar 4 John and Bill think I like each other 5 We believe they like each other In other words being grammatical and having a sensible meaning are two different things Sentence 5 shows the same thing you can think up two logically possible meanings but only one meaning is allowed by the rules of English This leads to the following basic point there is some rule of English that accounts for what each other can refer to but it is a tacit rule No one can look inside their mind to nd out what the rule is one can only look at the data and try to gure the rule out Linguists have worked on this particular rule for some time and have gradually made progress in stating the rule accurately But we cannot claim to have a nal answer I will present a partial answer here We will need two preliminary de nitions both of which will come up later on in the course A clause is intuitively speaking either a whole sentence or a sentence within a sentence it will generally have a subject and a verb or close equivalent We depict clauses by drawing brackets around them labeled S for little sentence 6 We like each others 7 John and Bill like each others 8 I like each others 9 John and Bill think I like each otherss 10 We believe they like each otherss Haves Introductarv Linguistics 1 5 Note that clauses can have clauses inside them A noun phrase is a syntactic unit that refers to a thing or a set of things For example in 6 and 7 the noun phrases are we each other John anal Bill and again each other With these de nitions we can write a tentative rule for what each other refers to l 1 Each Other Reference Rule Each other can refer only to noun phrases that are inside the smallest clause containing it In the tricky cases 45 the rule works fine it requires that each other refer to I and they respectively This can be seen graphically for 5 if we make a diagram using arrows to show legal and illegal reference believe they like each otherss 0k impossible Cases l 3 are easy there is only one noun phrase for each other to refer to and the rule permits this Notice that in a sentence with just one clause but two noun phrases in addition to each other there will be two possibilities for what each other might refer to 12 wrapped the ropes around each others 0k 0k This is just what our rule predicts Because of this the sentence has two possible meanings There are some further relevant data which are perhaps syntactically the most interesting 13 We consulted two detectives in order to find out about each otherss 14 They seem to us to like each otherss These sentences are mysterious it looks like there is no noun phrase at all that occurs inside the smallest clause containing each other other than each other itself But consider the meaning of the sentences someone is doing the finding out in 13 namely we and someone is doing the liking in 14 namely they Thus the peculiar clauses to final out about each other and to Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 6 like each other appear to have implicit noun phrases They have a meaning but they re not pronounced For purposes of analyzing explicitly let us ll them in 15 We consulted two detectives in order we to nd out about each otherss 16 They seem to us they to like each otherss With the implicit subjects lled in we can explain what is going on The Each Other Reference Rule needs slight revising 17 Each Other Reference Rule revised Each other can refer only to noun phrases including implicit noun phrases that are inside the smallest clause containing it Here is an analytic diagram for sentence 15 We consulted two detectives in order w to nd out about each therss impossible We will do more on this kind of rule later The major gap in the analysis as given so far is that we haven t said anything about what causes the implicit noun phrase to take on a particular meaningifor instance why does the implicit noun phrase in 15 have to mean we and not two detectives This would lead us into a different area of English grammar covering the implicit noun phrase behavior of in order to and many other grammatical constructions For now the point is this knowing English means that you know the Each Other Reference Rule in an intuitive sense But it does not mean that you know it explicitly Much of the work of linguistics consists of trying to make implicit knowledge explicit The method is much the same as in other sciences we gather data formulate hypotheses test the hypotheses against the data revise the hypotheses gather more data and so on Study Exercises for each other Answers below Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 7 Study Exercise 1 This sentence is ambiguous My sister and I gave our parents books about each other Explain each possible meaning and illustrate it with a diagram brackets and arrows like the ones given above Study Exercise 2 This sentence is ambiguous Bill and Fred persuaded Alice and Sue to buy telescopes in order to nd out more about each other For example in one reading you could continue In fact as it turned out Bill succeeded in nding out more about Fred but Fred did not succeed in nding out more about Bill In the other reading you could continue In fact as it turned out Alice succeeded in nding out more about Sue but Sue did not succeed in nding out more about Alice For each meaning ll in the implicit subjects shown with Then draw diagrams for the reference of each other So you ll end up with two diagrams Study Exercise 3 For this sentence My parents tell my sister and me every day to write books about each other there s only one meaning My parents tell my sister every day to write a book about me and tell me every day to write a book about my sister It can t mean My mother tells my sister and me every day to write a book about my father and my father tells my sister and me every day to write a book about my mother Explain why giving diagrams for both the possible and the impossible meaning 4 The eld of linguistics With this background here is a somewhat narrow de nition of the eld of linguistics it is the study of the largely implicit knowledge people have when they speak a language Some of the sub elds of linguistics are the following syntax study of rules for forming sentences semantics study of rules for meaning morphology study of rules for forming words phonology study of rules of pronunciation Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 8 In all cases the rules are of the kind known implicitly by native speakers not the kind learned in school Linguistics has two other major subf1elds that also involve rules but are not as directly focused on them phonetics which studies how sounds are produced and perceived and historical linguistics which studies how languages change Linguists attempt to arrive at explicit knowledge of all the world s languages I should point out that this task will never be completed First there are over 8000 different languages many of which are spoken in remote areas of the world1 More important the amount of explicit knowledge contained in just a single language would fill a whole library Linguists find it both frustrating and astonishing that a small child can acquire implicitly in just a few years the same knowledge that takes decades of hard work for linguists to figure out explicitly Linguists are also interested in developing a general theory of language a theory of the properties that all languages share These are called linguistic universals Finding universals is also challenging many linguists have the experience of having proposed a linguistic universal only to find out later on about languages that don t fit in 1 The best directory to the world s languages is the Ethnalague on line at httpwwwethnologuecom Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 9 Chapter 2 Morphology 5 Orientation In linguistics morphology means the study of word structure We re interested in the structure of individual words as well as the grammatical principles whereby words are formed Some of the terminology used here is probably familiar to you The stem of a word is its core the part that bears its central meaning Thus in undeniable the stem is deny and in insincerity the stem is sincere Material that is added to the stem thus modifying its meaning in some way consists principally of pre xes and suf xes The suf x able is pre xed to deny to form deniablez and the pre x un is added to the result to obtain undeniable Often multiple pre xes and suf xes can be added to the same stem producing ever longer and more elaborate words undeniability hyperundeniability Stem pre xes and suffixes are the building blocks from which words are assembled The term used for such building blocks by linguists is morpheme often de ned as follows 0 A morpheme is the smallest linguistic unit that bears a meaning Thus un deny and able are morphemes deniable is not a morpheme because it can be split de and ny are not morphemes because they are meaningless We can start with a bit of notation Words are shown broken into their morphemes with hyphens un deniability And pre xes and suf xes are shown with hyphens to identify them as such pre xes like un suf xes like ity You can think of the hyphen as the bit of imaginary glue with which a morpheme attaches to the stem 6 Two Kind of Morphology Most linguists acknowledge at least a rough distinction between two kinds of morphology word formation vs in ectional morphology We ll start with in ectional morphology In ectional morphology is grammatical morphology Here are some examples to start from English 0 tense on verbs present tense jumps past tense jump 0 number on nouns singular cow plural cowQ o a small amount of person and number agreement in verbs She sings vs They sing English is actually not a very good language for studying in ectional morphology because it doesn t have all that much of it Mandarin is a similar case But other languages such as 2 We ll ignore the change of y to i a convention of English spelling Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 10 Swahili Russian or Turkish have a great deal and students of these languages can spend years getting through it all 7 Morphological Analysis When they encounter an unfamiliar language linguists usually begin their work by carrying out a morphological analysis This involves gathering data determining what morphemes are present in the data and writing the rules that form the words from the morphemes There are no fancy methods for doing this basically one must scan a collection of morphologically similar words and determine which phoneme sequences remain the same whenever the meaning remains the same We will do this now for a fairly simple case namely a fragment of the nominal morphology morphology for nouns in Turkish Here are the data 1 el hand eV house zil bell 2 eli hand object eVi house object zili bell object 3 ele to a hand eye to a house zile to a bell 4 elde in a hand eVde in a house zilde in a bell 5 elim my hand eVim my house zilim my bell 6 elimi my hand object eVimi my house object zilimi my bell object 7 elime to my hand eVime to my house zilime to my bell 8 elimde in my hand eVimde in my house zilimde in my bell 9 elin your hand eVin your house zilin your bell 10 elini your hand object eVini your house object zilini your bell object 11 eline to your hand eVine to your house ziline to your bell 12 elinde in your hand eVinde in your house zilinde in your bell 13 elimiz our hand eVimiz our house zilimiz our bell 14 elimizi our hand object eVimizi our house object zilimizi our bell object 15 elimize to our hand eVimize to our house zilimize to our bell 16 elimizde in our hand eVimizde in our house zilimizde in our bell 17 eliniz your plur hand eViniz your plur house ziliniz your plur bell 18 elinizi your pl hand obj eVinizi your pl house obj zilinizi your pl bell obj 19 elinize to your pl hand eVinize to your pl house zilinize to your pl bell 20 elinizde in your pl hand eVinizde in your pl house zilinizde in your pl bell 21 eller hands eVler houses ziller bells 22 elleri hands object eVleri houses object zilleri bells object 23 ellere to hands eVlere to houses zillere to bells 24 ellerde in hands eVlerde in houses zillerde in bells 25 ellerim my hands eVlerim my houses zillerim my bells 26 ellerimi my hands obj eVlerimi my houses obj zillerimi my bells obj 27 ellerime to my hands eVlerime to my houses zillerime to my bells 28 ellerimde in my hands eVlerimde in my houses zillerimde in my bells 29 ellerin your hands eVlerin your houses zillerin your bells 30 ellerini your hands obj eVlerini your houses obj zillerini your bells obj 31 ellerine to your hands eVlerine to your houses zillerine to your bells 32 ellerinde in your hands eVlerinde in your houses zillerinde in your bells 33 ellerimiz our hands eVlerimiz our houses zillerimiz our bells Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 11 34 ellerimizi our hands obj evlerimizi our houses obj zillerimizi our bells obj 35 ellerimize to our hands evlerimize to our houses zillerimize to our bells 36 ellerimizde in our hands evlerimizde in our houses zillerimizde in our bells 37 elleriniz your pl hands evleriniz your pl houses zilleriniz your pl bells 38 ellerinizi your pl hands obj evlerinizi your pl houses obj zillerinizi your pl bells obj 39 ellerinize to your pl hands evlerinize to your pl houses zillerinize to your pl bells 40 ellerinizde in your pl hands evlerinizde in your pl houses zillerinizde in your pl bells We have here three columns indicating in ected forms of the three nouns meaning hand house and bell Abbreviations and grammatical conventions are as follows plur or pl abbreviate plural your pl is second person plural Here as a possessive it means belonging to you there being more than one of you object or obj means that that form would be used as the object of a verb Thus if one were to say in Turkish something like I saw my hand one would use 3 eli 8 Breaking up the words into morphemes The search as always is for invariant form paired with invariant meaning In the rst column every single form begins with the sounds el and has a meaning involving hands It seems inconceivable that hand could be anything other than el or that el could be anything other than hand inote in particular the rst line where el by itself means hand by itself The columns for house and bell are completely identical to the column for hand except that where column has el columns 2 and 3 have ev and zil are stems It is plain that ev means house and zil means bell Moving on we can compare 1 el hand 2 eli hand obj ect 3 ele to a hand Subtracting out el from the second and third forms it appears that i and e must be suf xes We can con rm this by casting an eye over the remainder of the data e goes together with the English word to given in the translations and likewise i with object The e and i suf xes apparently denote the grammatical role that the noun plays in a Turkish sentence a phenomenon called case Let s brie y digress with the basics of case 3 Thus the reference source on Turkish I m using gives the sentence Bes adam heykeli k1rdi five man statueaccusative broke Five men broke the statue Haves Introductarv Linguistics 1 12 Case is fundamentally an in ectional category of nouns though often adjective and articles agree with their noun in case Case tells us intuitively who is doing what to whom 7 it identi es the basic semantic roles ofthe participants in a clause In many languages Man bites dog is Man nominative bites dogaccusative and Dog bites man is Dognominative bites man accusative Nominative and accusative are probably the two most common cases Case is not the only way to show who is doing what to whom In languages with no case or illdeveloped case systems English the work done by case is taken over by strict word order and by prepositions Some typical cases in languages each language is different in its cases and their usage gt Nominative usually for subjects of sentences or the citation form of a word gt Accusative usually for objects of verbs gt Dative conveying the notion of to in English I gave the book to the student gt Locative conveying the notion of at in on etc There are many other cases Finnish is analyzed as having fifteen This isn t really that remarkable since many of these are simply that way of expressing notions that are expressed by prepositions In Turkish gt e is the suf x for the dative case gt i is the suf x for the accusative case gt de is the suf x for the locative case Inspecting the data in rows 2140 it is plain that every plural noun has the suf x ler Lastly there is a set of possessive suf xes which express essentially the same information as what in English is expressed by possessive pronouns like my and your 6 There are four possessive suffixes present in the dataTurkish has more but these are not included here 4 a gt im my gt in your gt imiz our gt iniz yourplural 4 Still other ways existiin Tagalog much of this information is given using prefixes or suffixes on the verb 5 Or their counterpart postpositions which follow their obj ect noun phrase 6 Their usage is not quite the same because if there is a noun possessor you use the suffix as well Thus in English we say for example Ayse s bell but in Turkish Aysenin zilsi which is literally Ayse s bellher similarly bizim zilimiz literally us s bellour Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 13 We can classify the possessive suffixes on the dimensions of person and number Number is simply the distinction between singular vs plural Person takes as a first approximation three values 0 First person refers to pronouns and grammatical endings that involve the speaker either alone or with others Thus in English I is a firstperson singular pronoun we is first person plural Second person refers to pronouns and grammatical endings that involve the hearer either alone or with others In Spanish m is a secondperson singular pronoun used to address one person and vosotros is a secondperson plural pronoun used to address more than one person Third person refers to pronouns and grammatical endings that involve neither the speaker nor the hearer Thus hesheit are thirdperson singular pronouns they third person plural Once we ve found all the parts we can restate the original data putting in hyphens to separate out the morphemes I ll do this just for the hand forms I ve also add a morpheme bymorpheme translation also separated out by hyphens this is called a gloss Glosses are meant to clarify structure rather than give an idiomatic reading 81111 Gloss Idiomatic translation 1 el hand hand 2 eli handacc hand object 3 ele handdative to a hand 4 elde handlocative in a hand 5 elim handl sg my hand 6 elimi handl sgacc my hand object 7 elime handl sgdat to my hand 8 elimde handl sgloc in my hand 9 elin hand2 sg your hand 10 elini hand2 sgacc your hand object 11 eline hand2 sgdat to your hand 12 elinde hand2 sgloc in your hand 13 elimiz handl plur our hand 14 elimizi handl pluracc our hand object 15 elimize handl plurdat to our hand 16 elimizde handl plurloc in our hand 17 eliniz hand2 plur your plur hand 18 elinizi hand2 pluracc your pl hand obj 19 elinize hand2 plurdat to your pl hand 20 elinizde hand2 plur loc in your pl hand 7 Standard English doesn t make the distinction between singular and plural in the second person though many regional dialects have a special plural pronoun yall used whenever the addressee is plural Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 14 21 eller handplural hands 22 elleri handpluralacc hands object 23 ellere handpluraldat to hands 24 ellerde handpluralloc in hands 25 ellerimi 26 ellerime 27 ellerim 28 ellerimde 29 ellerin 30 ellerini 31 ellerine 32 ellerinde 33 ellerimiz 34 ellerimizi 35 ellerimize ellerimizde elleriniz ellerinizi ellerinize 40 ellerinizde handplurall sgacc handplurall sgdat handplurall sg handplurall sgloc handplura12 sg handplura12 sgacc handplural2 sgdat handplural2 sgloc handplurall plur handplurall p1uracc handplurall plurdat handplurall plurloc handplural2 plur handplura12 pluracc handplura12 p1urdat handplura12 p1urloc my hands obj to my hands my hands in my hands your hands your hands obj to your hands in your hands our hands our hands obj to our hands in our hands your p1 hands your p1 hands obj to your p1 hands in your p1 hands 9 Classifying the suf xes and discovering order It is useful at this point to sort all the suf xes discovered according to their function 9111 Case endings i accusative e dative de locative Possessive suf xes im my a in your imiz our iniz Plural 1er yourplural In particular if you scan the data now greatly clari ed with hyphens and glosses you can nd two important generalizations o No word contains more than one possessive suf x or more than one case 0 Suf x order is invariant and goes like this Haves I nz raductarv Linguistics Plural precedes Possessive Suf x precedes Case With a word processor it s not hard to prove these relationships by lining up the relevant morphemes into columns with tabs Here the data once more displayed in this way Stem Plural 1 el 2 el 3 el 4 el 5 el 6 el 7 el 8 el 9 el 10 e1 11 e1 12 e1 13 e1 14 e1 15 e1 16 e1 17 e1 18 e1 19 e1 20 e1 21 e1 ler 22 e1 ler 23 e1 ler 24 e1 ler 25 e1 ler 26 e1 ler 27 e1 ler 28 e1 ler 29 e1 ler 30 e1 ler 31 e1 ler 32 e1 ler 33 e1 ler 34 e1 ler 35 e1 ler 36 e1 ler 37 e1 ler 38 e1 ler 39 e1 ler Poss Case hand handacc handdative handlocative handl sg handl sgacc handl sgdat handl sgloc hand2 sg hand2 sgacc hand2 sgdat hand2 sgloc handl plur handl pluracc handl plurdat handl plurloc hand2 plur hand2 pluracc hand2 plurdat hand2 plur loc handplural handpluralacc handpluraldat handpluralloc handplurall sg handplurall sgacc handplural 1 sgdat handplurall sgloc handplural2 sg handplural2 sgacc handplural2 sgdat handplural2 sgloc handplurall plur handplural 1 pluracc handplural 1 plurdat handplurall plurloc handplural2 plur handplural2 pluracc handplural2 plurdat hand hand object to a hand in a hand my hand my hand object to my hand in my hand your hand your hand obj ect to your hand in your hand our hand our hand object to our hand in our hand your plur hand your pl hand obj eVinizi to your pl hand in your pl hand hands hands object to hands in hands my hands my hands obj to my hands in my hands your hands your hands obj to your hands in your hands our hands our hands obj to our hands in our hands your pl hands your pl hands obj to your pl hands Haves 40 e1 ler iniz de I nz raduclarv Linguistics handpluralZ plurloc in your p1 hands Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 I 7 Study exercise 4 Reexamine these suffixes and propose a differentifinergrainedianalysis im my in your imiz our iniz yourplural Answers to Study Exercises Study Exercise 1 My sister and I gave our parents books about each other One meaning My sister gave our parents books about me and I gave our parents books about my sister Other meaning My sister and I gave our mother a book about our father and gave our father a book about our mother My sister and I gave our parents books about each other 3 0k Study Exercise 2 Bill and Fred persuaded Alice and Sue Alice and Sue to buy telescopes in order Bill and Fred to nd out more about each other impossible Bill and Fred persuaded Alice and Sue Alice and Sue to buy telescopes in order Alice and Sue to find out more about each other impossible impossible Haves Iniraduciarv Linguistics 1 18 Study Exercise 3 The crucial part is to identify the clauses and the implicit subject which must mean my sister and me and not my parents My parents tell my sister and me every day my sister and me to write books about each other ss 0k impossible Study Exercise 4 imiz is really im iz and iniz is really in iz We can make this work if we give the suf xes slightly more abstract meanings im doesn t mean my but more generally rst person im doesn t mean your but more generally second person Then iz means plural possessor Singular possessor is indicated by including no suf x 10 Position classes in in ectional morphology When we looked at the Turkish data the primary nding was that the morphemes could be arranged in a linear order which could be expressed as ve slots Stem Plural Possessor Possessor Case Person Number el hand ler im lst iz plural Q nominative ev house in 2nd i accusative zil bell e dative de locative In a long word like ellerimizale in our hands all ve slots get lled Stem Plural Possessor Possessor Case Person Number el ler in iz de hand plural lst plur poss locative In analysis words like ellerimizale are very useful since they demonstrate the need for ve slots The slots in a system like this are often called position classes Each position is an abstract location in the word which can be lled by a particular morpheme or set of morphemes Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 19 In the analysis given earlier we derived position classes using blocks of rules one block per class An important check on a position class analysis is that there should be no contradictions of ordering in the data if the analysis is correct We can look through the data and see that for example in i2 and de never precede ler that i2 and de never precede in that de never precedes i2 and similarly with the other morphemes Position classes can be de ned simply by looking at the morphemes and checking their ordering But in fact the usual picture is that the classes are related to morphological function For example it s hardly an accident that the two suffixes in the third Turkish slot are both possessor person suffixes The general principle is position re ects function This said it should be noted that there are exceptions the occasional language will take the same function and put some of the morphemes into different positions or fill a position with morphemes of variegated function For instance the Swahili morpheme cho which means roughly which gets put in a different position for positive and negative verbs kitabu akitaka cho Hamisi book SUBJOBJwant which Hamisi the book which Hamisi wants kitabu asicho kitaka Hamisi book SUBJNEGwhich OBJwant Hamisi the book which Hamisi doesn t want 11 Formalizing with a grammar Linguists seek to make their analyses as explicit as possible by expressing the pattern of the language with rules The rules taken together form a grammar We ll start with a very simple grammar for Turkish nominal in ection We ll assume that the stem el ev zil or whatever comes with morphological features specifying its grammatical content The bundle of features is called the morphosyntactic representation8 The job of our grammar will be to manifest this content with actual material For example we can start out with something like this for 40 elNumberplural PossessorNumberplural PossessorPerson2 CaseLocative The el part is the stem meaning hand it is enclosed in because this is the way you indicate the speech sounds phonemes of a word The part in is the morphosyntactic representation It contains four morphological features Number PossessorNumber PossessorPerson 8 Why We ll see later on the morphosyntactic representation transfers information over from the syntax to the morphology Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 20 Case Each feature has a value which is shown by placing it after a colon So you can read the formula elNumberplura1 PossessorNumberp1ural PossessorPerson2 CaseLocative as the stem e1 with a morphosyntactic representation indicating plural Number plural PossessorNumber second PossessorPerson and Locative Case We ll return later on to the question of where these features come from The grammar itself consists of four rules The order in which the rules are stated is significant and is part of the grammar Only the first rule is stated in full Number Rule Suffix 1er if the morphosyntactic representation bears the feature Numberplural Possessor Person Rule Add a possessor suffix as follows im if PossessorPerson1person in if PossessorPerson2person Possessor Number Rule Add a possessor suffix as follows iz if PossessorNumberp1ural Case Rule Add a case suffix as follows i if CaseAccusative e if CaseDative de if CaseLocative The reason that the rules must apply in the order given is that by doing this we construct the word from inside out adding a bit more to the material we ve already accumulated This inside out character will be shown immediately below You can show how the rules apply to a particular form by giving a derivation In linguistics a derivation shows each rule applying in succession and justifies the rules by showing that they correctly derive the observed forms For the Turkish form elleriniz in your plur hands 40 in the data from last time the derivation would look like this Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 21 elNumberplural PossPers2 PossNumplural CaseLocative hand with its morphosyntactic representation eller Numberqglural PossPers2 PossNumplural CaseLocative Number Rule elleri Numberplural P0ssPers2 PossNumplural CaseLocative Possessor Person Rule ellerinizNumberplural PossPers2 P0ssNumplural CaseLocative Possessor Number Rule ellerinizdeNumberplural PossPers2 PossNumplural CaseLocative Case Rule At each stage the relevant rule sees the right feature and adds the appropriate suf X Study Exercise 1 Derive 34 ellerimizi our handsaccusative starting with an appropriate morphosyntactic representation and using the rules above 12 The bigger picture Grammars like the one we are working one can produce a clearer understanding of large amounts of data It s worth pondering for instance how many forms a Turkish noun can have There are several choices to be made Number singular or plural thus two possibilities Possessor Person any ofthree l 2 3 his or her Possessor Number any of two singular plural Case nominative no ending accusative dative locative plus ablative from genitive s instrument with thus seven possibilities Multiplying these out every Turkish noun can appear in at least 2 X 3 X 3 X 7 84 forms of which we covered only 40 It seems likely that Turkish speakers often must produce a new form for a noun when they haven t heard a particular combination before The Turkish nominal system is a fairly simple one Turkish verbs for instance are quite a bit more compleX The most elaborate system I know of is the verbal system of Shona Bantu where according to the linguist David Odden the typical verb has about 10 trillion possible forms Odden has developed a system to generates these forms using a rather complicated set of rules most of the complication arises in getting the tones right It seems also likely that Turkish children or Shona children must also come up with a grammar they could not possibly memorize every form of every word We cannot knowiyeti to what eXtent their grammars resemble our grammars but the idea that through analysis and research we can get close to what they learn is a central idea of contemporary theoretical linguistics Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 22 13 The Source of Morphosyntactic Representations The discussion in the last chapter showed how we can write a set of rules that create morphologically wellformed words through the successive addition of affixes by rule But what do these rules apply to There are various answers given by various linguists here we will examine just one fairly representative one The idea is that the syntax of a language builds up a feature structure for every stem that appears in a sentence Thus in an English sentence like F red jumps the fact that the subject of the sentence Fred is in the third person means that the rules of the syntax cause the feature Person3 NumberSingular to appear on the stem jump this is socalled subjectverb agreemen Looking ahead to syntax we can draw a syntactic structure9 and the process of agreement S S NP VP NP VP l l l l N V gt N V l l l Fred Fred jump Numbersg jump Numbersg TenseiPres Person3 Tense Pres Person 3 Number sg Person3 feature copying We can assume that Fred is inherently Numbersg Person3 since it is a proper name The TensePres must be assumed at the start as well since it is part ofthe meaning ofthe sentence The operation above is part of syntax Once the rules of the morphology get apply the presence of these feature will cause a suffixation rule to apply which attaches the suffix that we spell s Here is a sample rule 3rd Sing Present Rule Suffix s when the morphosyntactic representation contains TensePresPersonSingNumber3 In sum we have quite a bit of descriptive work to do in a complete grammar the syntactic component arranges words in correct order and builds up the morphosyntactic representations 9 This is looking ahead so don t be alarmed if the diagrams aren t clear To clue you in a bit S Sentence NP Noun Phrase VP Verb Phrase N Noun V Verb vertical line means is part of Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 23 while the morphological component refers to the morphosyntactic representation in order to add the appropriate affixes 14 Another example of in ection Consider the personnumber endings of German in the present and past 10 Present Past 1 sg ich reite I ride ich reitete I rode 2 sg du reitest yousg ride du reitetest You rode 3 sg sieer reitet shehe rides sieer reitete shehe rode 1 pl wir reiten we ride wir reiteten we rode 2 pl ihr reitet you plur ride ihr reitetet you plur rode 3 pl sie reiten they ride sie reiteten they rode Things here are a bit tricky is the stem reite with endings like zero st t n t n or is it reit with endings like e est et en et en Further evidence we won t review here indicates that the second is correct Here are the forms broken up into position classes shown with vertical alignment Present Past 1 sg ich reit e ich reit et e 2 sg du reit est du reit et est 3 sg sieer reit et sieer reit et e 1 pl wir reit en wir reit et en 2 pl ihr reit et ihr reit et et 3 pl sie reit en sie reit et en The focus of attention is why the 3rd singular past is not sieer reitetetithis is the only place where the endings of present and past diverge To get this to happen we can use the following rules I Tense Marking Suffix t when the morphophosyntactic representations contains TensePast II PersonNumber Marking 10 I m glossing over some inessential complications arising from the fact that the stem reit ends in a t Haves Inl raductarv Linguistics 1 24 Suffix e if Person 1 NumberSingular st if Person2 NumberSingular e if TensePast Person3 NumberSingular et if TensePresent Person3 NumberSingular en if Person 1 NumberPlural et if Person2 NumberPlural en if Person3 NumberPlural You can see that PersonNumber marking for the 3rd person singular has to be split up by tense Thus the features are a bit tangled a single affix ends up manifesting quite a few in ectional features here et manifests three The case from English given in the preceding section is similar the s of jumps simultaneously manifests NumberSingular Person3 TensePresent In fact such tangling is found in languages all over the world Systems of in ectional morphology are well known for including asymmetries of this kind Linguists speak of charts like the one at the top of this section as paradigms a paradigm consists of all or a systematic portion of the in ected forms of a particular stem We can also speak of things like the present paradigm left column above or the past paradigm right column Subparadigms often involve paltial overlap thus the German present and past verb paradigms overlap in all but the third singular 15 What are the characteristic inflectional categories Every language has a set of in ectional categories though the sheer amount of in ection can vary quite a bit Mandarin Chinese has very little Turkish and Finnish are quite richly in ected English is closer to the Mandarin end of the scale Each in ectional category is expressed in the theory we are using as a feature within the morphosyntactic representations Here is a quick survey of some in ectional categories 15 Nominal In ectz39on Nouns and pronouns are often in ected for number singular plural and occasionally dual meaning exactly two or even trial exactly three Pronouns are in addition in ected for person first includes speaker second includes hearer third neither Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 25 15 1 1 Gender In a number of languages nouns are in ected for gender for instance in German nouns can be masculine feminine or neuter as we can tell by the de nite articles they take In some cases gender is semantically quite sensible der M arm themasculine man die Frau thefeminine woman Extraordinarily this system carries overioften quite arbitrarilyito the whole vocabulary of nouns irrespective of meaning Thus each of the three common items of silverware is a different gender in German der Lb39ffel themasculine spoon die Gabel thefeminine fork das Messer theneuter knife Thus gender is for the most part a purely formal device not an expression of meaning Gender involves many other semantic correlations that have nothing to do with biological seX From a web page intended to help learners of German httpmontgomerycas muohioedumeyersdekitchensinkgermangender I quote the following rules 60 Fabrics are predominantly masculine der Gingham der Kaschmir 61 Heavenly bodies are predominantly masculine derMond moon der Stem star 62 Forms of precipitation are predominantly masculine der Regen rain der Schnee snow 63 Bodies of water restricted to inland streams currents and stagnant bodies are predominantly masculine der See sea der T eich pond 64 Words denoting sound or loud noise or phonetic speech sounds are masculine der Dormer thunder der Dental dental sound der Diphthong 65 Dance steps and popular music forms are masculine der Jazz der Tango Such generalizations are pervasive in gender languages However since there are usually exceptions of various sorts it seems that people who know gender languages have memorized the gender of every word Gender is not just a property of familiar European languages it is also found in Semitic and a kind of system rather like gender but with at least a dozen types is found in Bantu languages 1512 Case Nouns and the syntactic phrases they occur in are marked for case which marks their role in the sentence See above XXX for a discussion of case Haves Introduclarv Linguistics 1 26 1 5 2 Verbal I n ection Very common is tense which gives the time of action relative to the present past I jumped present I jump future I will jump and other for example remote past tenses Aspect sets the boundaries of the action of the verb time for instance completed vs non completed action Verbs often agree with their subjects and sometimes their objects as well in features for nouns as shown above in section 10 These features include person 1 you w she is number I am we gender Here are fuller data for subject agreement in German for person and number Singular Plural 1st person ich glaube I believe wir glaub we believe 2nd person du glaubst yousing believe ihr glaubt youplur believe 3rd person ersie glaubt heshe believes sie glaubm they believe Verbs particularly second person forms see below can also be in ected for the degree of familiarity of the addressee thus English used to make a distinction between say thou believest addressed to intimates children and animals and you believe for less familiar addressees Most European languages Javanese Persian and Japanese have such systems today In various languages verbs are in ected for degree of belief thus from my German textbook Er sagte dass er krank ist He said that he sick isindicative He said he is sick acknowledging a belief held by all Er sagte dass er krank sei He said that he sick isweak subjunctive He said he is sick and it s not necessarily true Er sagte dass er krank ware He said that he sick isstrong subjunctive He said he is sick and the speaker doubts it Related to this is the category of verbal in ection in many languages which marks information known only by hearsay rather than by direct witness this is common in American Indian languages 153 Adjectival In ection Adjectives typically don t have their own in ectional categories but acquire in ection by agreeing with the nouns they modify thus German Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 27 ein gut Lb39ffel amasculine goodmasculine spoon eine gutg Gabel a feminine goodfeminine fork ein gutg M esser a neuter goodneuter knife 16 The principle of obligatory expression An important aspect of in ectional morphology is that it often involves obligatory choices When in English one says I bought the book it speci cally means one book not any old number of books Likewise books necessarily implies the plural To avoid the obligatory choice one must resort to awkward circumlocutions like book or books There are other languages for example Mandarin that work quite differently Thus the following sentence wo3 mai3 su1 I buy book is quite noncommittal about how many books are bought It is also noncommittal about when the buying takes place Thus an important aspect of the grammar of languages is the set of choices they force speakers to make when speaking this is determined by their systems of in ectional morphology Fundamentally there is a bifurcation between the two ways that thought is embodied in language The following diagram tries to make this clearer Thought concepts classifications ideas Grammar Content Number singular plural one vs more than one two three Tense present past overt statements about time now then Honoriflc formal informal overt labels of respect Mr Mood indicative subjunctive overt statements of degree of belief I doubt etc Languages differ each one takes a subset of the fundamental ideas and grammatically codifies them By this I mean that in some particular language a particular concepts get eXpresse as a grammatical features and that these feature is included in the morphosyntactic representations and is thus integrated into the grammar Whenever this happens the expression Haves Intraduclarv Linguistics 1 28 of the concept in question becomes obligatoryisince you have to obey the grammar of your language when you speak Alternatively a concept can remain uncodified grammatically and the speaker is free to express it or not as she chooses through choice of words and other means On the whole the forms of thought that can get integrated into grammar are as we might expect the ones that are most omnipresent in our lives time number belief vs doubt and the fundamental aspect of conversations speakerhearerother and their social relations 17 The typology of in ection A rough way of characterizing languages for their system of in ectional morphology is the following three way split isolating agglutinative in ecting o A language is isolating to the extent that it has little or no in ectional morphology Examples English Chinese A language is agglutinating if it has a rich in ectional morphology and each morpheme tends to expresses a single morphosyntactic feature Thus words tend to be long but have a very clear structure Examples Turkish Swahili A language is in ecting bad term since it s ambiguous if it has a rich morphology and morphemes express multiple features Example Latin somnus somni nm sleep Case Singular Plural Meaning of case Nominative somn us somn i for subjects Genitive somn i somn orum for possessors Dative somn o somn is Accusative somn um somn os for objects Ablative somn o somn is from Locative somn i somn is at on in Vocative somn e somn i for calling to someone The point of the example is that for instance us packs a considerable bundle of information it tells us that somnus is nominative that it is singular and with a few exceptions we will ignore that it is masculine We could write the rule like this Add us if CaseNominative Numbersingular Gendermasculine In general the agglutinative languages will have just one or a few features mentioned in each rule whereas the in ecting languages tend to have more This is just a more formal way of characterizing the basic distinction Haves Intraductarv Linguistics 1 29 All else being equal in ecting languages will tend to have shorter words than agglutinating languages However there is usually a cost to this terseness typically in an in ecting the same ending often serves multiple purposes so words tend to be in ectionally ambiguous WORD FORMATION 18 Rules of word formation The other function of morphology is to expand the stock of words in the language by forming new words from old Often linguists refer to this process as derivational morphology I will try to stick to the term word formation since it is more precise For example given that identi v is an existing word of English a rule of English word formation can create a new word identifiable From this another rule can provide identi ability and from this yet another rule can create unidentifiability 18 Rules of Word Formation Consider some words formed with the English suf x able able washable lovable thinkable growable doable We wish to write the word formation rule that attaches able to an existing word to form a new one There are three kinds of information that must be included in the rule First there is a change of form the existing word is augmented by the suffix This could be expressed with the formalism X gt X able Second there is a change of meaning X able means able to be Xed We will not formalize this since the task of representing meaning is far too big to take on in this context Finally there is often a change in part of speech able attaches to Verbs eg wash love think etc and forms Adjectives All three aspects of the rule can be expressed more compactly in the following abbreviated form able Rule X Verb gt X Verb able Adjemve Meaning able to be V ed You can read this as follows Take some string X that is a Verb Add to it the string obl Classify the resulting string as an Adjective
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'