Article | Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017), September 18-20, 2017, Università di Pisa, Italy | The Component Unit. Introducing a Novel Unit of Syntactic Analysis
Göm menyn

Title:
The Component Unit. Introducing a Novel Unit of Syntactic Analysis
Author:
Timothy Osborne: Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Ruochen Niu: Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
Download:
Full text (pdf)
Year:
2017
Conference:
Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017), September 18-20, 2017, Università di Pisa, Italy
Issue:
139
Article no.:
020
Pages:
165-175
No. of pages:
11
Publication type:
Abstract and Fulltext
Published:
2017-09-13
ISBN:
978-91-7685-467-9
Series:
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings
ISSN (print):
1650-3686
ISSN (online):
1650-3740
Publisher:
Linköping University Electronic Press, Linköpings universitet


Export in BibTex, RIS or text

This contribution introduces a novel unit of syntactic analysis, which is called the component. The validity and utility of the component unit are established in terms of chunking. When informants organize the words of sentences into groups, they are creating chunks, and these chunks then qualify as components in dependency syntax. By acknowledging the nature of chunking and the component unit, it is possible to cast light on controversial aspects of dependency hierarchies. In particular, the component unit, informant data, and the reasoning based on these provide an argument in favor of the traditional DG assumptions about hierarchical status of many function words (auxiliary verbs, prepositions, subordinators, etc.), and in so doing, they contradict the Universal Dependencies (UD) annotation scheme. The data discussed here are from English, but the methodology and reasoning employed are easily extendable to other languages.

Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017), September 18-20, 2017, Università di Pisa, Italy

Author:
Timothy Osborne, Ruochen Niu
Title:
The Component Unit. Introducing a Novel Unit of Syntactic Analysis
References:

Paul Steven Abney. 1987. The English noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.


John Anderson. 2011. The substance of language volume I: The domain of syntax. Oxford University Press.


Norbert Br√∂ker. 2003. Formal foundations of dependency grammar. In Vilmos √Āgel et al. (eds.), Dependency and valency: An international handbookof contemporary research, vol. 1, 294‚Äď310. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.


Ulrich Engel. 1994. Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache, 3rd ed. Erich Schmidt Verlag, Berlin.


Hans-Werner Eroms. 2000. Syntax der deutschen Sprache. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.


Chaim Gaifman. 1965. Dependency systems and phrase-structure systems. Information and Control 8, 304‚Äď337.


Thomas Gro√ü and Timothy Osborne. 2009. Toward a practical dependency grammar theory of discontinuities. SKY Journal of Linguistics 22, 43‚Äď90.


David Hays. 1964. Dependency theory: A formalism and some observations. Language 40, 511‚Äď525.


Peter Hellwig. 2003. Dependency Unification Grammar. Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research, ed. by Vilmos √Āgel et al., 593‚Äď635. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.


Hans J√ľrgen Heringer. 1996. Deutsche Syntax: Dependentiell. Stauffenburg, T√ľbingen.


Richard Hudson. 1984. Word Grammar. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.


Richard Hudson. 1990. An English Word Grammar. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.


Richard Hudson. 2007. Language networks: The new Word Grammar. Oxford University Press.


Sylvain Kahane. 1996. If HPSG were a dependency grammar‚Ķ Actes de TALN, Marseille, 22‚Äď24, 45‚Äď49.


Franz Kern. 1883. Zur Methodik des deutschen Unterrichts. Nicolaische Verlags-Buchhandlung, Berlin.


Franz Kern. 1884. Grundriss der Deutschen Satzlehre. Nicolaische Verlagsbuchhandlung, Berlin.


J√ľrgen Kunze. 1975. Abh√§ngigkeitsgrammatik. Series: studia grammatika XII. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin.


Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Timothy Dozat, Natalia Silvaire, Katrin Haverinen, Filip Ginter, Joakim Nivre, Christopher D. Manning. 2014. Universal Stanford Dependencies: A cross-linguistic typology. LREC 14.


Igor Mel’cuk. 1988. Dependency syntax: Theory and practice. Albany: State University of New York Press.


Igor Mel’cuk and Nikolai Pertsov. 1987. Surface syntax of English: A formal model with the Meaning- Text Framework. Benjamins, Amsterdam.


William O’Grady 1998. The syntax of idioms. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16, 79‚Äď312.


Timothy Osborne and Thomas Groß. 2016. The do-so-diagnositc: Against finite VPs and for flat non-finite VPs. Folia Linguistica 50, 1, 97-35.


Timothy Osborne, Michael Putnam, and Thomas Groß. 2012. Catenae: Introducing a novel unit of syntactic analysis. Syntax 15, 354-396.


Jane Robinson. 1970. Dependency structures and transformational rules. Language 46, 259‚Äď285.


Klaus Schubert. 1987. Metataxis: Contrastive dependency syntax for machine translation. Foris Publications, Dordrecht.


Stanley Starosta. 1988. The case for Lexicase: An outline of Lexicase grammatical theory. Pinter Publishers, London.

Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017), September 18-20, 2017, Università di Pisa, Italy

Author:
Timothy Osborne, Ruochen Niu
Title:
The Component Unit. Introducing a Novel Unit of Syntactic Analysis
Note: the following are taken directly from CrossRef
Citations:
No citations available at the moment


Responsible for this page: Peter Berkesand
Last updated: 2017-02-21