Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

E-raamat: Gradient Acceptability and Linguistic Theory

(Associate Professor, Department of English, Purdue University)
  • Formaat - PDF+DRM
  • Hind: 24,69 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
  • See e-raamat on mõeldud ainult isiklikuks kasutamiseks. E-raamatuid ei saa tagastada.

DRM piirangud

  • Kopeerimine (copy/paste):

    ei ole lubatud

  • Printimine:

    ei ole lubatud

  • Kasutamine:

    Digitaalõiguste kaitse (DRM)
    Kirjastus on väljastanud selle e-raamatu krüpteeritud kujul, mis tähendab, et selle lugemiseks peate installeerima spetsiaalse tarkvara. Samuti peate looma endale  Adobe ID Rohkem infot siin. E-raamatut saab lugeda 1 kasutaja ning alla laadida kuni 6'de seadmesse (kõik autoriseeritud sama Adobe ID-ga).

    Vajalik tarkvara
    Mobiilsetes seadmetes (telefon või tahvelarvuti) lugemiseks peate installeerima selle tasuta rakenduse: PocketBook Reader (iOS / Android)

    PC või Mac seadmes lugemiseks peate installima Adobe Digital Editionsi (Seeon tasuta rakendus spetsiaalselt e-raamatute lugemiseks. Seda ei tohi segamini ajada Adober Reader'iga, mis tõenäoliselt on juba teie arvutisse installeeritud )

    Seda e-raamatut ei saa lugeda Amazon Kindle's. 

This book examines a challenging problem at the intersection of theoretical linguistics and the psychology of language: the interpretation of gradient judgments of sentence acceptability in relation to theories of grammatical knowledge. Acceptability judgments constitute the primary source of
data on which such theories have been built, despite being susceptible to various extra-grammatical factors. Through a review of experimental and corpus-based research on a variety of syntactic phenomena and an in-depth examination of two case studies, Elaine J. Francis argues for two main
positions. The first is that converging evidence from online comprehension tasks, elicited production tasks, and corpora of naturally-occurring discourse can help to determine the sources of variation in acceptability judgments and to narrow down the range of plausible theoretical interpretations.
The second is that the interpretation of judgment data depends crucially on the theoretical commitments and assumptions made, especially with respect to the nature of the syntax-semantics interface and the choice of either a categorical or a gradient notion of grammaticality. The theoretical
frameworks considered in this book include derivational theories (e.g. Minimalism, Principles and Parameters), constraint-based theories (e.g. Sign-based Construction Grammar, Simpler Syntax), competition-based theories (e.g. Stochastic Optimality Theory, Decathlon Model), and usage-based
approaches. The volume shows that while acceptability judgment data are typically compatible with the assumptions of various theoretical frameworks, some gradient phenomena are best captured within frameworks that permit soft constraints-non-categorical grammatical constraints that encode the
conventional preferences of language users.

Arvustused

The greatest strength of Francis' book lies in the author's meticulous and nuanced interpretations of a broad range of experimental results. These discussions not only illustrate the value of good scientific practice, but they also highlight how difficult it is to derive conclusive interpretations about the factors that give rise to acceptability judgments. * Tobias Ungerer, Journal of English Language and Linguistics * The book bridges the interests of theoretical linguistics in the field of syntax, experimental syntax, and related aspects in the psychology of language [ ...] All in all, this book is a must for future work on acceptability judgments for the complete overview it offers, the well-reasoned argumentation, and the author's own claims on gradience and soft constraints to capture the wide range of linguistic factors that can affect judgments on a gradient scale. * Caterina Cacioli, Università degli Studi di Firenze, LINGUISTList * The question that runs through the entire book can be summarized as follows: how can we interpret the judgments that speakers make about the acceptability of sentences of their language in relation to the theories held by the linguists who analyze them? That question involves one aspect that is often not made explicit: the interpretation of any data is conditioned by commitments and theoretical assumptions, both epistemological and methodological. The explanation of and reflection on this key point for any scientific field is one of the central axes of this book, making it essential reading. * Gabriela Mariel Zunino, Cuadernos de Lingüística de El Colegio de México * This book is a truly far-reaching, relevant piece of work. In addition to a comprehensive discussion on gradient acceptability judgments, it also presents an overview of current theoretical approaches and possible limitations they might exhibit in interpreting gradient judgments. One of the truly remarkable achievements of this book is the way in which Francis critically discusses the differences between the current theoretical approaches, but at the same time, brings together ideas from different linguistic schools of thought - which is certainly not an easy task to undertake. * Ana Werkmann Horvat, Jezikoslovjle * Francis tackles head-on deep methodological questions about the nature of linguistic data, and shows that modern linguistic research demands a more systematic exploration of variation and gradient acceptability; one that takes non-syntactic factors into account, uses converging evidence from alternative data sources, and re-assesses its own theory-internal assumptions. In the process, Francis uncovers compelling evidence that some forms of gradience call for non-categorical grammatical constraints ('soft constraints'), which cannot be reduced to non-syntactic factors nor categorical grammar constraints. * Rui P. Chaves, University at Buffalo, the State University of New York * Elaine Francis' book is compelling reading as it addresses a complex topic with fundamental relevance to all grammatical descriptions and theories. Francis makes a convincing case for gradience in grammar and for a multi-methodological approach to assessing language data. It is a comprehensive and principled synthesis of the literature enriched by the author's own research. * Edith Moravcsik, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee *

General Preface viii
Acknowledgments ix
List of Figures
xii
List of Abbreviations
xiv
1 The problem of gradient acceptability
1(17)
1.1 Knowledge of grammar and linguistic intuitions
1(6)
1.2 Gradient acceptability: the case of selectional restrictions
7(1)
1.3 Formal syntactic explanations: superficial similarities can mask underlying structural differences
8(2)
1.4 Prosodic explanations: ill-formed prosodic structures may be confusable with syntactic rule violations
10(1)
1.5 Semantic explanations: semantic anomalies may be confusable with syntactic rule violations
11(1)
1.6 Pragmatic explanations: grammatical sentences may appear ill-formed in an inappropriate discourse context
12(1)
1.7 Processing explanations: grammatical sentences may appear ill-formed when they are hard to process
13(2)
1.8 Processing explanations: ungrammatical sentences may appear well-formed when they are hard to process
15(1)
1.9 Overview of the book
16(2)
2 Theories of grammatical knowledge in relation to formal syntactic and non-syntactic explanations
18(37)
2.1 Derivational grammars
20(6)
2.1.1 Form-meaning correspondences in derivational grammars
22(2)
2.1.1 Processing-based explanations in derivational grammars
24(2)
2.2 Constraint-based grammars
26(9)
2.2.2 Form-meaning correspondences in level-mapping grammars
27(2)
2.2.2 Form-meaning correspondences in sign-based grammars
29(4)
2.2.2 Processing-based explanations in constraint-based grammars
33(2)
2.3 OT
35(7)
2.3.3 Form-meaning correspondences in OT
37(1)
2.3.3 Stochastic OT, gradient grammar, and processing-based explanations
38(4)
2.4 Gradient grammaticality in derivational theories: a look back
42(5)
2.5 Usage-based approaches: grammar as a complex adaptive system
47(5)
2.6 Conclusions
52(3)
3 On distinguishing formal syntactic constraints from other aspects of linguistic knowledge
55(19)
3.1 Outbound anaphora in English
57(2)
3.2 Factive islands and manner-of-speaking islands in English
59(4)
3.3 Word order and prosody in Czech
63(3)
3.4 Auxiliary selection and impersonal passives in German
66(5)
3.5 Conclusions
71(3)
4 On distinguishing formal syntactic constraints from processing constraints
74(29)
4.1 Amelioration and isomorphism
75(5)
4.2 Syntactic satiation
80(4)
4.3 Working memory capacity
84(3)
4.4 Overgeneration of ungrammatical sentences
87(5)
4.5 Cross-linguistic differences: superiority effects in Czech, English, German, and Russian
92(9)
4.6 Conclusions
101(2)
5 On the relationship between corpus frequency and acceptability
103(23)
5.1 Evidence from close correlations: acceptability mirrors corpus frequency
107(3)
5.2 Evidence from mismatches: differences in acceptability among low-frequency forms
110(5)
5.3 Evidence from statistical preemption: judgments of unusual verb-construction combinations
115(2)
5.4 Evidence from machine learning: deriving acceptability judgments from corpus patterns
117(6)
5.5 Conclusions
123(3)
6 Relative clause extraposition and PP extraposition in English and German
126(31)
6.1 NPI licensing in RCE as evidence for syntactic structure?
128(3)
6.2 Freezing effects as grammar or processing?
131(5)
6.3 Subclausal locality: hard constraint, soft constraint, or neither?
136(8)
6.4 What are the Predicate Constraint and the Name Constraint?
144(11)
6.5 Conclusions
155(2)
7 Resumptive pronouns in Hebrew, Cantonese, and English relative clauses
157(37)
7.1 Resumption in contexts where gaps are permitted: object relatives in Hebrew and English
160(12)
7.2 Resumption in contexts where gaps are not permitted: coverb stranding in Cantonese
172(6)
7.3 Does resumption rescue islands? Evidence from Hebrew and English
178(11)
7.4 Gradient judgment data and the distinction between grammatical and intrusive resumption
189(5)
8 Gradient acceptability, methodological diversity, and theoretical interpretation
194(43)
8.1 Form-meaning isomorphism and the syntactic status of semantic contrasts
195(6)
8.2 The case for gradient grammars
201(10)
8.3 The place of acceptability judgments in an expanding syntactic toolkit
211(16)
8.3.3 How corpus data, production tasks, and self-paced reading tasks can inform our syntactic analyses
211(2)
8.3.3 Split intransitivity in Spanish and English: evidence from acceptability judgments, visual probe recognition, structural priming, and cross-modal lexical priming
213(14)
8.4 Expanding the toolkit further: some thoughts on big data, neurolinguistics, and the future of syntactic theory
227(8)
8.5 Conclusions
235(2)
Glossary 237(8)
References 245(18)
Name Index 263(4)
Subject Index 267
Elaine J. Francis is a professor in the Department of English at Purdue University, where she has been teaching linguistics and directing the Experimental Linguistics Lab since 2003. She completed her PhD in linguistics at the University of Chicago in 1999 and taught for three years in the Department of English at the University of Hong Kong. In her research, she investigates syntactic, discourse, and processing-based factors that affect the realization of syntactic alternations in English and Cantonese.