Gapping
SYNTAX: elimination of an identical verb in the second clause
of a conjunction:
(i) John reads a newspaper and Mary _ a bookLIT. Ross (1967), Neijt (1979), Kerstens (1981), Koster (1987).
GB
Short for Government and Binding theory. Hence "GB-framework". The
theoretical framework initiated in Chomsky (1981). (Chomsky prefers the
term
"°Principles and Parameters"
framework).
LIT.
Chomsky (1981),
Chomsky & Lasnik (1992).
Gender
MORPHOLOGY: a term used to express to fact that nouns and
determiners can belong to different morphological classes
(°Phi-features). In many
languages nouns fall into three groups: masculine, feminine, and neuter
nouns, each group being inflected differently.
EXAMPLE: in Russian all nouns belong to one of three groups.
If a noun ends in a non-palatalized consonant in its basic form it is
masculine (e.g. stol 'table'), if it ends in -a it is
feminine (e.g. lampa 'lamp'), and if it ends in -o it
is neuter (e.g. okno 'window'). Some languages only distinguish
two genders:
EXAMPLE: Dutch only differentiates between neuters and non-neuters;
non-neuters take the definite article de (de man 'the
man'), while neuters take the definite article het (het
kind 'the child').
Generalized Quantifier
SEMANTICS: a generalization of the universal and existential
quantifier of predicate logic to a higher-order concept of a quantifier
as a set of sets. This generalization was already implicit in Montague
(1974) but made explicit in Barwise and Cooper (1981).
Montague (1974) proposed a compositional translation of quantified sentences
making use of °lambda-abstraction.
He showed that a compositional translation of (i) into (ii) is possible if
the subject every boy takes the predicate walks, as in (iii):
(i) Every boy walks
(ii) All(x) [ boy(x) -> walk(x) ]
(iii) Walk translates into walk
every boy translates as lambda P [ All(x) [ boy(x) -> P(x) ]]
The noun phrase every boy denotes a set of properties (or sets), namely the
set of properties that every boy has and sentence (i) is true when the
property of walking is in this set. Barwise and Cooper showed that this
treatment of NPs as sets of sets can be used to assign denotations to those
NPs that cannot be represented in first-order logic, like most, or only very
cumbersomely, like three. They did not use Montague's intermediate logical
language, but a direct interpretation in set-theoretic terms (|| || is the
interpretation function):
(iv) || most boys || = { X subset E : | X intersect || boys || >
| || boys || - X | }
|| two boys || = { X subset E : | X intersect || boys || | >=‘ 2 }
The interpretation of most boys is the set of sets such that there are more
boys that they do contain than don't, and the interpretation of two boys is
the set of sets which contain at least two boys.
Generalized Quantifier
Theory (GQT)
SEMANTICS: a logical semantic theory which studies the
interpretation of noun phrases and determiners. The formal theory
of generalized quantifiers already existed as a part of mathematical
logic (Mostowski 1957) and it was implicit in
°Montague Grammar (Montague 1974),
but it has been put to use in its full force in Barwise & Cooper (1981)
and Keenan & Stavi (1986), as a framework for the investigation of universal
constraints on quantification and inferential patterns concerning quantifiers.
It has been applied to explain the distribution of
°negative polarity items and
°weak and
°strong noun phrases.
Within GQT there are two perspectives on noun phrase interpretation,
which are formally equivalent. One perspective focuses on the interpretation
of noun phrases as sets of sets (i.e.
°generalized quantifiers)
which take a predicate as their argument; the other approach focuses on
the interpretation of determiners as relations between sets. See
°determiner.
LIT.:
Barwise & Cooper (1981),
Gamut (1991),
Keenan & Stavi (1986),
Montague (1974),
Mostowski (1957),
Partee et al. (1990).
Generate
A set of rules is said to generate a string or a structure if a finite
sequence of applications of those rules will result in the string or
structure as output. EXAMPLE: a rewrite grammar, consisting
of a start symbol, a set of auxiliary symbols, a set of terminal symbols,
and a set of rewrite rules is said to generate those sentences or structures
that can be arrived at through a finite succession of applications of those
rewrite rules starting with applying a rule to the start symbol and each
successive rule being applied to the output of the former, until no
auxiliary symbols remain. The classes of structures that rules of a given
type can generate define the strong generative capacity of that type; the
classes of strings that rules of a given type can generate define the weak
generative capacity of that type.
°Phrase structure rules. In
actual practice the term 'generate' has become equivalent to 'characterize
explicitly'.
LIT.
Chomsky (1963),
Hopcroft & Ullman (1969),
Brandt Corstius (1974).
Generative Semantics
SYNTAX/SEMANTICS: dissident branch of generative linguistics
based on the hypothesis that °deep
structures are to be identified with
°semantic representations.
Generative semantics opposed °in
terpretative semantics in the sixties and seventies.
LIT.
Lakoff (1971),
McCawley (1968).
Generic interpretation
SEMANTICS: the interpretation of a noun phrase as referring to
a kind, to all members of a kind, or to any typical representative.
EXAMPLE: the italicized NPs in (i) are interpreted generically.
(i) a The cat is a domestic animal
b Cats are intelligent
c A cat loves to sleep
In the semantic literature, generic noun phrases are analyzed as names
or definite descriptions of kinds or as a special kind of generic
quantification over the members of a kind. Sentences with a generic
interpretation express a generalization or a habit, a state which cannot
be said to be true on one particular moment. Examples are (ii)a and b.
(ii) a The sun rises in the East
b John usually eats pork for breakfast
In many languages, generic sentences are in the simple present tense or
the imperfective aspect.
Gerund
MORPHOLOGY: gerunds are deverbal nouns which inherit the
subcategorization properties of the corresponding verbs. Moreover,
gerunds appear in syntactic positions typical for nouns, although
their behaviour is strictly speaking verbal in nature.
EXAMPLE: English verbs have a gerundive counterpart ending
in the suffix -ing (cf. (ii)). These nominalizations in
-ing, like verbs, can be modified by adverbials, while nouns
can only be modified by adjectives (cf. (iii)):
(i) Tom critized the book
Tom sarcastically criticized the book
(ii) Tom's criticizing the book
Tom's sarcastically/*sarcastic criticizing the book
(iii) Tom's criticism of the book
Tom's *sarcastically/sarcastic criticism of the book
Gerunds are also called verbal nouns.
GF-theta
SYNTAX: a °GF which is associated
with an element with a °theta-role.
Glide
PHONOLOGY: a sound produced as a vowel but with the distributional
properties of a consonant. Glides are also referred to as 'semi-vowels'. In
the production of the glides /j/ and /w/ the vocal tract is slightly narrower
than for the vowels /i/ and /u/ respectively.
Glottal
PHONOLOGY: an articulation involving the
°glottis. The vocal cords are held tightly
together; after release the air escapes with great force. For instance,
the sound (or more precisely, the lack of sound) indicated with the
phonetic symbol [ ], produced before a vowel in Dutch ge-[ ]eerd.
Glottis
PHONOLOGY: the space between the vocal cords.
Goal
SYNTAX: one of the thematic roles.
EXAMPLE: in John gave me the book the thematic pattern is
taken to be one in which the book (the Theme) moves from John (the
Source) to me (the Goal).
LIT.
Fillmore (1968),
Gruber (1965),
Jackendoff (1983).
Governing category
°Minimal
governing category.
Governing domain
SYNTAX: domain in which all elements are
°governed by the same governor.
Government
SYNTAX: structural relation between a
°governor (a head or maximal projection)
and a governee. Government is usually considered to be a necessary condition
for °case marking and for
°proper government (see
°ECP). A range of near-identical definitions
have been proposed, with slightly different empirical predictions in these
and other areas. (i) is a typical example of such a definition.
(i) alpha governs eta iff alpha °c-commands eta
and there is no °barrier for eta that
°excludes alpha
The core case of government is the relation between a head and its
complement; this case is captured by every existing definition. Thus,
in (ii),
(ii) XP
|
X'
| \
X YP
/ |
ZP Y'
| \
Y WP
/ |
UP W'
|
W
X governs its complement YP, hence can case-mark it (if X is a case-assigning
head) and properly govern it (if X is a lexical head). Depending on the
definition of barrier, X may or may not govern ZP (with possible consequences
for the treatment of
°Exceptional Case Marking).
The definition of government will usually exclude X governing UP (allowing
UP to be an (ungoverned) °PRO subject),
but sometimes allows ZP to govern UP (allowing ZP to properly govern UP, if
they are coindexed). The c-command (sometimes m-command) clause prevents W
from governing ZP, with consequences for the proper government of subjects.
Governor
SYNTAX: an element that has the capacity to
°govern.
GQT
°Generalized
Quantifier Theory.
Grammatical Function
SYNTAX: grammatical functions are subject of, object of, complement
of, head of, etc., which in
°configurational languages
correspond to specific syntactic positions.
LIT.
Chomsky (1981).
Greed
SYNTAX: (minimalist theory) principle which keeps an element A
from entering a syntactic operation unless it satisfies a need of A itself.
LIT.
Chomsky (1992).
GT (generalized transformation)
SYNTAX: (minimalist theory) operation by which a phrase-marker
K1 is inserted in a designated position phi in a phrase-marker K, such
that the resulting phrase-marker K* satisfies X-bar theory. If the
phrase-marker K1 is already part of the phrase-marker K (but distinct
from phi), GT instantiates what is known as 'move alpha'.
LIT.
Chomsky (1992).