Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Syntax 3
page 1
Phrase structure 2
Important things you will learn in this section:
What distinguishes arguments from adjuncts.
Why sentence structure involves a mental lexicon, in which each word has a lexical entry.
The structure scheme by which adjuncts are attached
(where?)
(when?)
(how?)
(why?)
Here the constituents that are arguments are underlined, and adjuncts are italicized.
(2) a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
[My best friend] ate [a bowl of vegetable soup] [in Brighton] [at four o'clock]
[My brother] sold [his neighbour] [his old radio]
[John] met [our neighbour] [in the park] [on Tuesday]
[Mary] dined [in Salerno] [at four oclock]
[Unser Nachbar] isst [am
Morgen] [oft] [ein weiches Ei]
Our neighbour eats in-the morning often a soft
egg
Our neighbour often eats a soft-boiled egg in the morning.
page 2
Such PPs with nouns are classified as arguments because when they are left out, there is a
sense in which they are understood to be present, in the same way as they are with a verb.
Nouns relating to verbs can often have a reading as a process or a reading as a result. So the
process construction (= the constructing) is always the construction of something.
Construction with a process meaning thus works the same way as the verb construct, with
arguments. The result construction (= a building) has no arguments, because this is a result,
not a process.)
Nouns which are related to transitive verbs will often take arguments. Nouns which mean
things which are a part of a relationship often take arguments too.
(4) a.
b.
c.
d.
Notice that there are also adjuncts that go with nouns. These also often have the form of a PP.
(5) a. the daughter of Mary Anne Evans [PP from her first marriage]
b. the student of literature [PP in Tbingen]
However this test must be applied with some care: arguments are not always obligatory. For
example, eat may stand with or without an object. The absence of a constituent does not
mean it is an adjunct; it may just be understood. If we say Bella was eating, it is clear that
Bella was eating something, even if we dont say what. We cant eat nothing. So:
(7) Bella was eating nothing
means "Bella wasn't eating". On the other hand, (8) is meaningless.
(8) *Bella was sleeping something
Uniqueness: an argument can be realized by one constituent, but not by two, or by none.
(9) a. [My sister] is sleeping.
b.* [my sister] [my brother] is/are sleeping.
c.* Is sleeping.
On the other hand, there can be many adjuncts with a given verb or noun:
(10) a. Edward slept [in the park] [at noon] [on Tuesday].
b. The destruction of the city [in the 13th century] [after a long battle]
c. an [uninhabited] [big] [white] house [near the beach]
page 3
Category: Arguments are often DPs, but not always. We can tell that the PP in (10) is an
argument of the verb put. The verb put requires a place for the direct object to be put.
Arguments may be required to be of a particular category. This is not so of adjuncts.
(11) a. *Mary put the book
b. *Jacob lived
c. *George looked/felt
requires
requires
requires
Word order: In English, an object normally stands next to its verb. If there is an adjunct, it
will follow the argument. We cannot usually put the adjunct between the verb and its object.
This tendency exists across languages, but other factors affect the order too, so it may not be
clear in every language.
(12) a. John read [a book] [in the garden]
V argument adjunct
b.*John read [in the garden] [a book]
V adjunct
argument
(13) a. John saw [Mary] [in the cafeteria] [on Tuesday]
b.*John saw [in the cafeteria] [Mary] [on Tuesday]
c.* John saw [in the cafeteria] [on Tuesday] [Mary]
The same effect can be observed with nouns.
(14) a. a student [of linguistics] [in Tbingen]
b.*a student [in Tbingen] [of linguistics]
(15) a. the daughter [of Mary] [from her first marriage]
b.*the daughter [from her first marriage] [of Mary]
page 4
Arguments are the constituents that occur in the argument structure of the lexical entry.
Adjuncts do not occur in the lexical entry.
(17) I put my mobile phone into my pocket last night to keep it safe.
The constituents [I], [my mobile phone], and [into my pocket] are arguments, since they
represent <DP1, DP2, PP3> in the argument structure of put. On the other hand, [last night]
and [to keep it safe] are adjuncts, and thus do not appear in the argument structure of put.
page 5
lexical
entry:
V
|
put
a book
ategory: V
arg.-struc.: <X1, <DP2>>
...
N
|
neighbor
lexical
entry
DP2
The
DP2
PP3
a book
on the table
category: V
arg.-struc.: <X1, <DP2, PP3>>
...
PP
V
|
sleep
of Mary
category: N
arg.-struc.: < <DP2>>
...
N
|
house
category: V
category: N
arg.-struc.: <X1, < >>
VP
V
|
read
VP
DP
a book
PP
of Mary
V
|
put
DP
a book
PP
on the table
Remember: Since arguments are requirements of the head, they must be attached as sisters
to the head X. They are thus daughters of the the phrasal projection of the head XP.
page 6
XP
X
XP
YP
argument
XP
ZP
adjunct
Arguments are sisters to X, a word, and daughters to XP, the mother of X. Since adjuncts
are optional, there is no fixed position for them. Adjuncts are sisters to XP and daughter to a
higher XP. We have to generate this additional phrasal projection above the existing
phrasal projection XP.
(26)
PP
NP
|
N
|
tourist
PP
from Gascony
(adjunct)
of France
with a camera
(adjunct)
PP
DP
PP
VP
|
V
|
sleep
in the garden
(adjunct)
a book
PP
during the show
(adjunct)
This difference between arguments and adjuncts makes sense in terms of the lexical entry:
the specification from the lexical entry of a word X drives the addition of sisters to the word
level category X. Adjuncts are not projected by the argument structure, they are added on
the outside, so to speak, on a new outer layer.
(27)
lexical
entry:
YP
argument
category: X
arg.struc.: YP
YP
adjunct
page 7
This explains why several adjuncts can be stacked. The addition of each adjunct causes the
addition of a new highest phrasal node. We can do this again and again (and again.....).
(28)
a.
b.
c.
VP
VP
VP
|
V
|
slept
VP
|
V
|
slept
VP
PP
VP
|
V
|
slept
in the park
PP
PP
at noon
in the park
This structural difference between arguments and adjuncts explains the difference in wordorder that we saw above. We can build a structure of a verb plus complement plus adjunct:
(29)
VP
VP
V
|
read
PP
DP
in the garden
(adjunct)
a book
The argument DP is sister to the V and daughter of VP. The adjunct PP is sister to VP and
daughter of VP . Fine.
If we add the adjunct first, it becomes sister of VP, daughter of a new VP. If we want to add
an argument after this, there is no attachment position which is both after the adjunct and still
sister to V. The argument can therefore not be attached outside the adjunct.
(30)
VP
VP
|
V
|
read
VP
PP
in the garden
(adjunct)
VP
|
V
|
read
DP
PP
in the garden
(adjunct)
a book
page 8
run quickly
sing in the choir
3. Distinguish adjuncts and arguments and draw trees for the following:
see the sea
the brother of the prince
(to) eat some chips with your fingers
sleep on the sofa
prepare the lunch in the kitchen
write carefully on the card
watch the television
the queen of the Netherlands on her throne
listen to the radio in the morning.
describe my theory with some examples
leave the town for a while
a letter from my brother
a statue of the bishop of this province
a photo of my cousin from the south
4. das Meer sehen
the sea see
mit diesen Essstbchen den Reis essen
with these chopsticks the rice eat
die abbltternde Bemalung der
Mauer
the peeling.off painting of.the wall
klar sehen
clearly see