next up previous contents
Next: Restrictive features on slot Up: (Morpho)Syntactic features Previous: (Morpho)Syntactic features

Preliminary Recommendations

 

Categorial realisation of a slot

A slot can be occupied by a terminal or a non-terminal category.

Non-terminal categories

Justification

The easiest way to define subcategorisation is to refer to traditional complements or to logical arguments of a predicate. In both cases, these subcategorised elements have phrasal instantiations, which must be specified in syntactic terms.

List of non-terminal categories

We set up a list of absolutely necessary and uncontroversial non-terminal categories.

Our list is the following: S, VP, NP, PP, AP, ADVP, DETP and XP.

S: Sentence
-- Example: We made it
VP: Verb Phrase
-- No subject given: to become a president
NP: Noun Phrase
-- a very pleasant day for fishing
PP: Preposition Phrase
-- for the sake of charity
AP: Adjective Phrase
-- very easy to please
ADVP: Adverb Phrase
-- quite familiarly
DETP: Determiner Phrase
-- almost every
XP: Under-specified phrase
-- any possible phrase.

We are aware that other categories are used in the linguistic community, but they seem to be specialisations of existing categories, compensating, in some formalisms, for the lack of restricting features.

Restricting features are at the user's disposal in EAGLES. The variety of features, feature values and feature combinations provides (in association with a category selected from our list of categories) for a very powerful means of expression. In this way, we ensure that any phrasal restriction can be expressed.

As a consequence, our list of categories remains very short. Sentences, for instance, do not have to be split into that-clause, infinitival, interrogative-clause or whatever. In this way, we avoid explosion in the number of categories, which is otherwise mainly due to the mixing of different kinds of information in the category label.

Another consequence is that our list of categories is completely language independent, whereas morphosyntactic features can be very language dependent.

Terminal categories

Justification

The need for terminal categories is not obvious at first sight. We consider the following cases.

Verb complementation and other complementation

Verb complementation, which is best known, is not concerned with such a specification, except for impersonal subjects. However, the concept of complementation and the need for subcategorisation is not restricted to verbs.

Subcategorisation applies virtually to any entry. As such, major categories like adjective, noun and adverb definitely need subcategorisation specifications.

(64)displaymath7522  A loaf of bread(N)

(65)displaymath7522  Curious about these things(ADJ)

(66)displaymath7522  Plenty of bread(ADJ)

In the long run, minor categories may also be candidates for subcategorisation specifications. For example, some prepositions call for infinitivals, some do not.

We may see `subcategorisation' as nothing else but `lexical selection'. However, this latter notion is much larger than `complementation'. What comes under lexical selection may be:

Fine grained subcategorisation

Subcategorisation may be more or less fine grained. This requirement shows up with the encoding of large scale lexicons only. Some specifications require one to go down to the terminal level, close to phrase rewriting.

For example, some predicative adjectives take an impersonal subject:

(67)displaymath7522  It is obvious that this subject must be taken into account

(68)displaymath7522  Il est évident que nous devons traiter ce sujet

As the needs for such specifications cannot be settled once and for all (too many lexical units to be considered, too many languages to be handled, too many views on lexicon and subcategorisation), allowing for terminal categories in slot definitions covers such specifications.

Lexical unit specification

When describing complementation patterns, restrictions have to be placed not only on subcategorised elements, but also on the subcategorising element. Some restrictions must be added in a syntactic frame on the lexical unit itself: auxiliary, tense, number and so on. These restrictions are treated in a similar way to restrictions on complements, that is to say by restricting features on a category. Therefore, the lexical unit is pointed to by its terminal category:

(69)displaymath7522  To go down to the cellar (to have gone down, be down)(V[Aux:BE])

(70)displaymath7522  Descendre à la cave (être descendu)

(71)displaymath7522  To go down the steps (to have gone down)([Aux:HAVE])

(72)displaymath7522  Descendre les escaliers (avoir descendu)

List of terminal categories

The set of terminal categories which may be entered in a slot derives directly from the list of categories provided by the Morphosyntax group. This guarantees coherence between the different layers of the lexicon in terms of linguistic approach and formal descriptive language and sets up an interface between layers.

For more information on these categorial labels (definition and usage) please refer to the EAGLES CLWG Morphosyntax document. The list of shared categories is the following: noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, adverb, conjunction, adposition, determiner, article and interjection.



next up previous contents
Next: Restrictive features on slot Up: (Morpho)Syntactic features Previous: (Morpho)Syntactic features