Gaps in Gaps in GPSGAuthor(s): Carlos PieraSource: Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 16, No. 4 (Autumn, 1985), pp. 681-683Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4178465 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 06:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The MIT Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Linguistic Inquiry.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.210 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 06:07:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SQUIBS AND DISCUSSION 681

(17) a. A pronoun may not be to the left of the variable it is coindexed with unless the pronoun is in an embedded sentence.1

b. Languages like English and Mandarin Chinese ad- ditionally require that there be a controlled PRO to the left of the pronoun in such a configuration (Higginbotham (1980, 688)).

References

Aoun, J. (1983) "Logical Forms," Linguistic Inquiry 14, 325- 332.

Chomsky, N. (1977) Essays on Form and Interpretation, El- sevier North-Holland, New York.

Higginbotham, J. (1980) "Pronouns and Bound Variables," Linguistic Inquiry 11, 679-708.

Lasnik, H. (1976) "Remarks on Coreference," Linguistic Anal- ysis 2, 1-22.

GAPS IN GAPS IN GPSG Carlos Piera,

Universidad Aut6noma de Madrid

In Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (Gazdar and Pullum (1982), and references therein) "unbounded dependencies" are handled by means of the feature "/." As usual, let A/B be short- hand for a category A from which a constituent of category B is missing. A number of linguists (e.g. Maling and Zaenen (1982), Bowers (1983)) have pointed out that multiple extrac- tions, insofar as they would correspond to multiple slash cate- gories A/B/C . . . , appear to require more power than is avail- able to context-free phrase structure grammars. I would like to add the observation that we must distinguish between two types

' Sentences like (i) are not counterexamples to the proposed Left- ness Condition.

(i) Madhuu ke pass un larakiyon ke naam hain jinhen Madhu those girls names has who una-kii saason ne jalaa diyaa thaa. their-poss. mothers-in-law burn did 'Madhu has the names of the girlsi who theiri mothers-in-law burned.'

Although the pronoun in this example is not in an embedded sentence, it is not bound to the variable to its right. Instead, it is coreferential with the head of the relative clause, as Lasnik (1976) and Aoun (1983) have pointed out for similar sentences in English. Accordingly, sentence (i) has (ii) for its broad LF-representation.

(ii) Madhuu ke paas un larakiyoni ke naam hain jinheni Madhu those girls names has who unak-kii saason ne xi jalaa diyaa thaa. their mothers-in-law burn did

In (i) the pronoun una is coreferential with the noun phrase un larakiyon (i = k). Such an analysis is not available for sentences (5)-(8).

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.210 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 06:07:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

682 SQUIBS AND DISCUSSION

of multiple extraction. The more familiar case is that of a con- stituent A from which a constituent B and a constituent C are independently missing. But there are also instances of a con- stituent A that is missing a constituent B, which in turn is miss- ing a constituent C. Therefore, multiple extractions are not ac- commodated in GPSG simply by allowing the feature "/I" to take multiple values or by admitting multiple occurrences of "/," whatever problems are otherwise associated with these alternatives (on which see Gazdar (1982) and especially Engdahl (1983)).

Both kinds of multiple gap construction exist in Spanish (Torrego (1984)). Corresponding to a sentence like (1) and to parallel nonmovement questions like (2), there are multiple questions like (3):

(1) Has recibido [NP un libro] [pp de Paris]. (you) have received a book from Paris

(2) j,Has recibido [NP cuantos libros] [pp de (you) have received how-many books from donde]? where

(3) [s[pp De dondel no sabes [SJNP cuantos from where (you) don't know how-many

libros]i dice Julia [s3 que has recibido ti tj]]]? books says Julia that (you) have received '[From wherel] don't you know [how many books]i Julia says that you have received ti tj?'

In (3) two separate constituents bearing the indices i andj have been extracted from the lower clause S3.

On the other hand, corresponding to (4) and to (5) is (6):

(4) Has leido [NP un libro [pp de Cervantes]]. (you) have read a book by Cervantes

(5) ,Has leido [NP cuantos libros [pp de quien]]? (you) have read how-many books by whom

(6) jsj[pp De quienl] no sabes by whom (you) don't know

[SJNP cuantos libros tj]i dice Julia how-many books says Julia

[s3 que has leido till]? that (you) have read

'[By whom]j don't you know [how many books tj] Julia says that you have read ti?'

In (6) a constituent indexed j has been extracted from a con- stituent indexed i, which in turn has been extracted from the lower clause S3.

Let us assume as above that the constituent indexed j is a PP and the constituent indexed i an NP in both sets of examples. We would then have a category S'/NP/PP in (3) as well as in

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.210 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 06:07:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

SQUIBS AND DISCUSSION 683

(6). This is unsatisfactory. Although it adequately characterizes the extraction domain in (3), it clearly misses the point in (6). If double slash categories are needed, as seems to be the case, some will be "second-order" slash categories. Thus, the ex- traction domain in (6) is something like S'/[NP/PP], not S'/NP/ PP. This fact must be taken into account when evaluating the simplicity of the GPSG model.

References

Bowers, J. (1983) "Conditions on Logical Form," Linguistic Analysis 11, 27-101.

Engdahl, E. (1983) "Some Remarks on the Treatment of Un- bounded Dependencies and Parasitic Gaps in Gazdar, Klein, Pullum & Sag 'Coordinate Structure and Un- bounded Dependencies'," ms., University of Stock- holm.

Gazdar, G. (1982) "Phrase Structure Grammar," in P. Jacobson and G. K. Pullum, eds. (1982).

Gazdar, G. and G. K. Pullum (1982) Generalized Phrase Struc- ture Grammar: A Theoretical Synopsis, distributed by the Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington.

Jacobson, P. and G. K. Pullum, eds. (1982) The Nature of Syn- tactic Representations, Reidel, Dordrecht.

Maling, J. and A. Zaenen (1982) "A Phrase Structure Account of Scandinavian Extractions," in P. Jacobson and G. K. Pullum, eds. (1982).

Torrego, E. (1984) "On Inversion in Spanish and Some of Its Effects," Linguistic Inquiry 15, 103-129.

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.210 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 06:07:35 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions