Cover not available
Part of
Dependency Linguistics: Recent advances in linguistic theory using dependency structures
Edited by Kim Gerdes, Eva Hajičová and Leo Wanner
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 215] 2014
► pp. 273–298

Type 2 Rising

A contribution to a DG account of discontinuities

| Kirkland, WA, USA
This contribution examines discontinuities in DG. These discontinuities are addressed in terms of catenae and rising. Any tree or any subtree of a tree as a catena. Rising occurs when a governor fails to dominate one (or more) of its governees. Two sorts of rising are distinguished: type 1 and type 2. Type 1 rising obtains when the risen catena is a constituent, whereas type 2 rising obtains when the risen catena is a nonconstituent. The Rising Principle expresses the main trait of instances of rising. Discontinuity sorts (e.g. fronting, scrambling, extraposition, NP-internal displacement) are classified in terms of type 1 and type 2 rising.
Published online: 1 October 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.215.13osb
References (15)
References
Bröker, N. 2003. Formal foundations of dependency grammar. In Dependency and Valency: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 1, V. Ágel, L.M. Eichinger, H.W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H.J. Heringer & H. Lobin (eds), 294–310. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Duchier, D. & Debusmann, R. 2001. Topology dependency trees: A constraint based account of linear precedence. In Proceedings from the 39th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) , 180–187. Toulouse.
Engel, U. 1994. Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache, 3rd rev. edn. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar
Eroms, H.-W. 2000. Syntax der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eroms, H.-W. & Heringer, H.J. 2003. Dependenz und lineare Ordnung. In Dependency and Valency: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 1, 247–262. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Gerdes, K. & Kahane, S. 2001. Word order in German: A formal dependency grammar using a topology model. In Proceedings from the 39th annual meeting of The Association of Computational Linguistics (ACL), 220–227. Toulouse.
Groß, T. & Osborne, T. 2009. Toward a practical DG theory of discontinuities. SKY Journal of Linguistics 22: 43–90.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. 2000. Discontinuities. In Les grammaires de dependance (Dependency grammars) [Traitement Automatique des Langues 41], S. Kahane (ed.), 7–56. Paris: Hermes.Google Scholar
Kunze, J. 1975. Abhängigkeitsgrammatik [Studia Grammatica 12]. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
van Langendock, W. 2003. The dependency concept and its foundations. In Dependency and Valency: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 1, V. Ágel, L.M. Eichinger, H.W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H.J. Heringer & H. Lobin (eds), 170–188. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
O’Grady, W. 1998. The syntax of idioms. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16: 79–312.Google Scholar
Osborne, T. 2005. Beyond the constituent: A DG analysis of chains. Folia Linguistica 39(3–4): 251–297.Google Scholar
Osborne, T., Putnam, M. & Groß, T. 2012. Catenae: Introducing a novel unit of syntactic analysis. Syntax 15(4): 354–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. 1967. Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.
Tesnière, L. 1969. Éléments de syntaxe structural, 2nd edn. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar