General Preface |
|
viii | |
Acknowledgments |
|
ix | |
|
|
xii | |
|
|
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) |
|
|
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) |
|
2.1.2 Processing-based explanations in derivational grammars |
|
|
24 | (2) |
|
2.2 Constraint-based grammars |
|
|
26 | (9) |
|
2.2.1 Form-meaning correspondences in level-mapping grammars |
|
|
27 | (2) |
|
2.2.2 Form-meaning correspondences in sign-based grammars |
|
|
29 | (4) |
|
2.2.3 Processing-based explanations in constraint-based grammars |
|
|
33 | (2) |
|
|
35 | (7) |
|
2.3.1 Form-meaning correspondences in OT |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
2.3.2 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) |
|
|
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) |
|
|
71 | (3) |
|
4 On distinguishing formal syntactic constraints from processing constraints |
|
|
74 | (29) |
|
4.1 Amelioration and isomorphism |
|
|
75 | (5) |
|
|
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) |
|
|
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) |
|
|
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) |
|
|
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) |
|
8.3.1 How corpus data, production tasks, and self-paced reading tasks can inform our syntactic analyses |
|
|
211 | (2) |
|
8.3.2 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) |
|
|
235 | (2) |
Glossary |
|
237 | (8) |
References |
|
245 | (18) |
Name Index |
|
263 | (4) |
Subject Index |
|
267 | |