control in english and danish presentation at naes ’04 university of aarhus, may 27 th -29 th...
Post on 31-Mar-2015
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Control in English and Danish
Presentation at NAES ’04University of Aarhus, May 27th-29th
Torben Thrane[Aarhus School of Business]
Structure of the presentation
Control – what is it?
Two classic approaches to control
Types of control
Control in Danish
My approach to control
Jamie
with Jamie all night
Jamie loves to dancea.
b. Seeing dance is a sight for sore eyes
c. Jim thinks that dancing with Jamie is heaven
e. The party was given just to dance
Anyone
Anyone
?
d. Jim allowed Bill to dance with Jamie only once
EfterAfter
atto
havehave
drukketdrunk
det meste af dagen,the most of day-the,
blevbecame
ByskolenTown School-the
sidste stop for en 25-årig mandlast stop for a 25-year man
= Having been drinking for most of the day, the Town School became the last stop for a 25-year old man
Control is not always easy!
Politiken, Oh Danmark, 29th May 2004
- under the heading School swimming in booze
a. “The notion of control is invoked whenever the interpretation of a constituent involves an ‘understood (or missing) subject’ whose reference is determined by a NP which is not in the subject position of the constituent in question.” [Farkas, 1988:27]
b. “The classical province of the theory of control lies within what might be grouped together as the phenomena of understood reference for an argument position of a head, where a reference to a thing x is said to be understood with respect to a given position of a given head if there is no expression in that position referring to x, but one takes it that the position is appropriately related to x, either through another independent argument or position in the sentence or discourse in question, or as pragmatically supplied.” [Higginbotham, 1992:79]
c. “The control problem concerns how to determine the understood subject of infinitival and gerundive VPs that lack an overt local subject.” [Jackendoff & Culicover 2003:517]
- Therefore, syntactically, the embedded structure is clausal (CP)
- Therefore it has a syntactic subject (the Projection Principle)
• Semantically, an embedded control structure is propositional
• Referentially, the embedded subject is both anaphoric and pronominal
- Therefore, it is ungoverned (the PRO-theorem)
• PRO is controlled by either the subject, the dative, or the object of the matrix clause
The Syntactic (GB+) Theory of Control
• The controller is identified through co-indexation with PRO (not shown).
PRONPS V NPO [CP[IP ][VP (NPD)to INFGERUND ][VP ] ]
- Therefore it has a subject argument
The Semantic (Chierchia) Theory of Control
John promised Jamie to dance
• Syntactically, embedded structures are non-finite VPs
• Embedded non-finite VPs are nominalizations, hence arguments
• Control is a matter of lexical entailmant
• The controller is identified by theta-role and by ‘functional adjacency’
• Semantically, VP-arguments are either properties or propositions
Arg2V to INFGERUND ]1[VP
Arg3
promised Jamie, (to-dance, John)
Types of control
Obligatory
John hopes to win a fortunePROa.
SC
John wants to win a fortunePROb. Jim
OC
John gave to reada book PROc. Jim
DC
Non-obligatory
How about going for a swim?PROf.
Speaker/hearer control
John talked about winning a fortunePROe.
Free Arbitrary (anybody)
John hopes that winning a fortunePROd. will save you
Long-distance Backward
Types of control
Adjunct
SC
Jim left Jamie fire HarrytoPRO] [CP[IP[CP ]]
Cf. Jim left Jamie in order to fire Harry
Complement
OC
Jim left Jamie fire HarrytoPRO[CP[IP[CP ]]
Cf. Jim left it to Jamie to fire Harry
Jim left Jamie to fire Harry
Constituents
Obligatory
Optional
John his shoes in the bathroomput on
onConstitutional
+argumental -argumental
+necessary Complement Parasite
-necessary Argument Satellite
Typology of sentence constituents
+necessary = selected by V
-necessary = selected by V´
+argumental = available as subject/object
-argumental = unavailable as subject/object
VP
•
V´
•
V
S
A
C
P
put on
his shoes
John
in the bathroom∑
∏
∑ = situation type
Argument structure
Input to
Modalization
Structure
IP
Information
Structure
CP
∏ = proposition
Theses
Control is a semantico-syntactic phenomenon
The control domain is syntactically VP
Obligatory control is control from [+arg]-consituents– controlled structures are complements, parasites or satellites
In Danish, parasitic and satellite control is marked by prepositionswhile complement control typically is unmarked
The obligatory control domain is semantically ∏
Free control is control without a controller- controlled structures are satellites
Control structures are syntactically VP
P1: They lack explicit subjects
Jamie elskerloves
atto
dansedance
P2: Subjects are external to V´
C: Control structures are syntactically V´
The evidence of selv ( = self)
Jamie elskerloves
atto
dansedance
selvself[VP ]
SC
= Jamie loves to dance herself
So, selv is an emphatic realization of PRO
Jamie selv elsker at danse self loves to dance
Jamie elsker at danse selv loves to dance self
Could be an argument for raising rather than control, but --
Selv Jamie elsker at danse Self loves to dance
The obligatory control domain disallows tense and modality– tense and modality are assigned at the level of modalization
*Jamie elskerloves
atto
dansedance
måttemay-INF
a.
The obligatory control domain is semantically ∏
b. Jamie elskerloves
atto
dansedance
få lov tilget leave to
atto
- not because of the semantics of måtte
c. Jamie sigessay-PRES- PAS
atto
dansedance
måttemay-INF
i morgentomorow
- nor because måtte in general is barred from control
VP
V´
V
VP
DP
blev holdtwas given
festenthe party
for at danse med Jamieto dance with Jamie
Complement
Satellite
Free Control is control without a controller- controlled structures are satellites
JannieJamie
lovedepromised
atto
fyrefire
ArneHarry
*JannieJamie
lovedepromised
atto
fyrefire
ArneHarry
PREP
[ ]
[ ]
In Danish, parasitic and satellite control is marked by prepositionswhile complement control typically is unmarked
Control into complement
Satellite/Parasite
JanniJamie
lovedepromised
JensJim
en fridaga day off
a. atto
fyrefire
ArneHarry
for*for
OC
JanniJamie
lovedepromised
JensJim
en fridaga day off
b. atto
fyrefire
ArneHarry
til*to
SC
for = in order tofor = in exchange for
Cf. For at fyre Arne lovede Janni Jens en fridag *For to fire Harry promised Jamie Jim a day off
Cf. *Til at fyre Arne lovede Janni Jens en fridag *To to fire Harry promised Jamie Jim a day off
Cf. Jannie lovede Jens en kat til at fange mus Jamie promised Jim a cat *to to catch mice
Controlled satellites and parasites are marked by different prepositions
?OC
VP
VP
V
PP
DP
lovedepromised
JanniJamie
for (selv) at fyre Arnefor (self) to fire Harry
Satellite
Argument
V´
DP
JensJim
V´
DP
en fridaga day off
Complement
Complement
SC
Janni lovede Jens en fridag for selv at fyre ArneJamie promised Jim a day off for self to fire Harry
VP
V
PP
lovedepromised
for (selv) at fyre Arnefor (self) to fire Harry
VP
DP
JanniJamie
Argument
Satellite
V´
DP
JensJim
V´
DP
en fridaga day off
Complement
Complement
OC
Cf. Jens blev lovet en fridag for (selv) at fyre Arneblev lovetwas promised
VP
V´
V
DP
DP
lovedepromised
JanniJamie
til (?selv) at fyre Arne*to (self) to fire Harry
Argument
Complement
V´
VP JensJim
V´
DP
en fridaga day off
Parasite
Complement
?OC
JanniJamie
lovedepromised
JensJim
atto
hyrehire
SvendSven
a. atto
fyrefire
ArneHarry
for*for
SCOC
SC
JanniJamie
lovedepromised
JensJim
atto
hyrehire
SvendSven
SC
b. atto
fyrefire
ArneHarry
til*to
OC
for = in order tofor = in exchange for
Complement
[ ]Satellite
[ ]
[ ]
Complement Parasite
[ ]
VP
V´
V
DP
PP
lovedepromised
JanniJamie
til (*selv) at fyre Arne*to (self) to fire Harry
Argument
Complement
V´ PP
JensJim
V´
VP
at hyre to hire
Complement
SvendSven
DP
V´ DP
(selv)
V
Argument
Parasite
SCV´ C
Jannie lovede Jens (selv) at hyre Svend til at fyre ArneJamie promised Jim (self) to hire Sven *to to fire Harry
Complement
VP
V´
V
DP
DP
overtaltepersuaded
JanniJamie
ArneHarry
Argument
Complement
VP
JensJim
V´
PP
Parasite
P
DP
(selv)
OC
Jannie overtalte Jens til (selv) at fyre ArneJamie persuaded Jim *to (self) to fire Harry
tilArgument
V´
V DP
at fyreto fire
Complement
Conclusions
Control phenomena are difficult to generalize, but …
There is a tendency in Danish to distinguish argumental fromnon-argumental control by the use of prepositions for the latter
There is a tendency in Danish to use the preposition til to signalcontrol into parasites, other prepositions to signal control intosatellites
-- but there is a lot more to be said!
top related