SELECTED CHESS COMPOSITIONS - GEORGE GR ATZER - 2 GEORGE GR ATZER

Robert Malouf

Description

• expression écrite

SELECTED CHESS COMPOSITIONS GEORGE GRATZER 1

• magyar sakkelet
• chess masters at the chess club
• chess compositions george gratzer
• chess magazine
• chess compositions
• youngster on the right side of the picture
• white wins

Sujets

• Halmos
• Masters
• Magazine
• Magyar
• Compositions
• George

Informations

• Publié par: osso0
• Nombre de lectures: 27
• Langue: English

Extrait

AconstructionalapproachtoEnglishverbalgerunds
RobertMalouf
StanfordUniversity
Englishverbalgerundshavelongbeenofinteresttosyntacticians. Verbal
gerundphrasesdisplayamixofnominalandverbalpropertieswhichprovide
achallengetoanysyntacticframeworkthatassumesastrictversionofX-bar
theory. Variousapproacheshavebeenproposedtogetaroundtheseprob-
lems, buttheyallinvolveabandoningafundamentallydesirabletheoretic
assumptionoradoptingahighlyabstractstructureforwhichindependent
motivationisdi cultto nd,orboth.Anidealanalysisofverbalgerundsin
Englishwouldbeabletoaccountfortheirmixedverbalandnominalproper-
tieswithouttheadditionofotherwiseunmotivatedmechanisms.Inthispaper,
IwillproposeananalysisbasedonrecentworkinConstructionGrammarand
Head-drivenPhraseStructureGrammarthattreatsverbalgerundsasahy-
bridcategorythatinheritssomepropertiesofnounsandsomepropertiesof
verbs.
1 Propertiesofverbalgerunds
Thestrongestevidenceforthenominalnatureofverbalgerundscomesfrom
theexternaldistributionofverbalgerundphrases(VGerPs).VGerPsappear
incontextswhereotherwiseonlynounphrasescanoccur. Forone,clauses,
unlikeNPs,aregenerallyprohibitedfromoccurringsentenceinternally,as
shownin(1).
(1) a.*IbelievethatPattookaleaveofabsencebothersyou.
b.*WhydoesthatPattookaleaveofabsencebotheryou?
However,VGerPsaresubjecttonosuchconstraint:
(2) a. IbelievethatPat’s/Pattakingaleaveofabsencebothersyou.
b. WhydoesPat’s/Pattakingaleaveofabsencebotheryou?
Thisisapointaboutwhichtherehasbeensomedisagreementintheliterature.
Reuland(1983),forinstance,claimsthataccusativesubjectVGerPscannot
appearclauseinternally.However,considerthefollowingexamples:
(3) a.*DidthatPatgotarrestedbotheryou?
b.*DidforPattogetarrestedbotheryou?
c.*Didtogetarrestedbotheryou?
d.?DidPatgettingarrestedbotheryou?e. Didgettingarrestedbotheryou?
f. DidPat’sgettingarrestedbotheryou?
g. DidPat’sarrestbotheryou?
While(3d)maybesomewhatawkward,thereisacleardi erenceinaccept-
abilitybetween(3a{c)ontheonehandand(3d{g)ontheother.ThereforeI
thinkitisreasonabletoconcludethatwithrespecttotheprohibitionagainst
sentence-internalclausalarguments,VGerPsbehavelikeNPsandnotlikeSs.
Onethingworthobservinghereisthatverbalgerundphrasesdonothave
thefulldistributionofNPs. Inparticular,asweseein(4),verbalgerunds
cannotbepossessivespeci ers.
(4) a. Pat’sleaveofabsence’sbotheringyousurprisesme.
b.*Pat’s/Pattakingaleaveofabsence’sbotheringyousurprisesme.
But,asZwickyandPullum(1996)observe,onlyarestrictedsubclassofwhat
areotherwiseclearlyNPscanshowupaspossessives. So,(4)suggeststhat
verbalgerunds,likeoftheothercasestheydescribe,fallintoa\functionally
restricted"subclassofnounsthatcannotheadpossessivephrases.
Ontheothersideofthings,therearecontextswhichadmitverbalgerunds
butnotregularNPs. J rgensen(1981)andQuirketal. (1985:1230)discuss
aclassofpredicativeadjectiveswhichselectforanexpletivesubjectanda
verbalgerundcomplement,asin(5).
(5) There’snouse(you/your)tellinghimanything.
Thefactthatthecomplement’ssubjectcanappearinthepossessiveshows
thatthecomplementreallyisaverbalgerundphraseandthatthisisnota
caseofsubject-to-objectraising. Examplessuchasthisprovidesuggestive
evidencethatverbalgerundsformasubcategoryofnoun.
WhiletheexternalsyntaxofverbalgerundsismuchlikethatofNPs,their
internalstructureismorelikethatofVPs. Forone,VGerstakeaccusative
NPcomplements,whilethenominalgerundin(6b)canonlytakeaPPcom-
plement:
(6) a. (Pat’s/Pat)loudlycalling(*of)therollstartedeachday.
b. Theloudcalling*(of)therollstartedeachday.
Anotherverbpropertyofverbalgerundsisthatverbalgerundstakeadverbial
modi ers.Incontrast,commonnounstakeadjectivalmodi ers:
(7) a. Pat nanced(me/my)carefullyrestoringthepainting.
b. Thecareful/*carefullyrestorationofthepaintingtooksixmonths.Similarly,verbalgerunds,unlikenouns,canbenegatedwiththeparticlenot:
(8) a. Pat’snothavingbathedforaweekdisturbedtheotherdiners.
b.*Thenotprocessingoftheelectionresultscreatedascandal.
Thesefactshavebeenusedtomotivatetheclaimthatverbalgerunds
mustbeverbsatsomelevel. However, noneofthebehaviorexhibitedin
(6){(8)isuniquetoverbs. Someoftheverb-likepropertiesofgerunds,such
aslicensingadverbialmodi ers,arealsosharedbydeterminers,prepositions,
andadjectives:
(9) a. Sandyisawakenedearlyalmosteverymorning.
b. Sandylivesdirectlybeneathadancestudio.
c. Sandy’sapartmenthasaninsu cientlythickceiling.
Similarly,notcanbeusedinsomecircumstancestonegateadverbs,adjectives,
PPs,anddeterminers:
(10) a. Notsurprisingly,thedefendanttooktheFifth.
b. TheconferencewillbeheldinSaarbruc¨ken,notfarfromtheFrench
border.
c. NotmanypeoplewhohavegoneoverNiagaraFallslivetotellabout
it.
Thesefactsaboutmodi cationandnegationdonotshowthatverbalgerunds
areverbs.Whattheyshowisthatverbalgerunds,unlikecommonnouns,are
partofalargerclassofexpressionswhichincludesverbs.
Thecomplementationfactsalsodonotconstituteastrongargumentthat
verbalgerundsmustbeverbs. Likeverbsandverbalgerunds,prepositions
alsocantakeNPcomplements.Ontheotherhand,someverbsonlytakePP
complements:
(11) Thestrikeextended*twoweeks/throughthesummer.
Thefactthatsomeverbalgerundstakeaccusativeobjectsisthereforenotes-
peciallystriking.Whatisimportantisthataverbalgerund,unlikeanominal
gerund,takesthesamecomplementsastheverbfromwhichitisderived:
(12) a. Chriscasuallyputtheroastintheoven.
b. Chris’s/Chriscasuallyputtingtheroastintheovenappalledthe
visitingvegetarians.
c. Chris’scasualputtingoftheroastintheovenappalledthevisiting
vegetarians.So,whatwecansayisthataVGerPheadedbythe-ingformofaverbhas
thesameinternalsyntaxasaVPheadedbya niteformofthatsameverb.
Tosummarize, VGerPshavefourbasicpropertiesthatneedtobeac-
countedfor.Thesearegivenin(13).
(13) a. Averbalgerundtakesthesamecomplements astheverb from
whichitisderived.
b. Verbalgerundsaremodi edbyadverbsandnotbyadjectives.
c. Theentireverbalgerundphrasehastheexternaldistributionofan
NP.
d. Thesubjectofthegerundisoptionaland,ifpresent,canbeeither
agenitiveoranaccusativeNP.
Thepropertiesin(13)aresharedbyaccusativesubject(acc-ing),genitive
subject(poss-ing),andsubjectless(pro-ing)verbalgerundphrasesandare
notsharedbyanyotherEnglishconstructions. Thethreetypesofverbal
gerundsseemtobesubtypesofasinglecommonconstructiontype,andany
analysisofverbalgerundsoughttobeableaccountfortheirsimilaritiesina
systematicway.
Itisimportanttonote, however, thattherearedi erencesamongthe
threetypeswhichalsomustbeaccountedfor(Reuland1983,Abney1987).
Ofcourse,themostobviousdi erenceisthede nitionalone,namelythecase
ofthesubject. Inthatrespect,poss-ingsaremorelikeNPs,whileacc-ings
aremorelikeSs.Anotherdi erencecanbefoundintheiragreementbehavior
whenconjoined:
(14) a. ThatPatcameandthatChrisleftbothers/??botherme.
b. Patcoming(sooften)andChrisleaving(sooften)bothers/??bother
me.
c. Coming(sooften)andleaving(sooften)bothers/??botherme.
d. Pat’scomingandChris’sleaving??bothers/botherme.
e. PatandChris*bothers/botherme.
Conjoinedacc-ingorpro-ingVGerPs,likeconjoinedSs,prefersingular(or
default)numberagreementontheverb.Conjoinedposs-ingVGerPs,likecon-
joinednouns,preferpluralagreement. Furthermore,thetwotypesofverbal
gerundscannotbecomfortablyconjoined:
(15) a.*Pat’scomingandChrisleavingbothers/botherme.
b.*PatcomingandChris’sleavingbothers/botherme.Thepatternsofcompatibilityin(14)and(15)follownaturallyfromtheas-
sumptionthatacc-ingandposs-ingVGerPsareofdi erentsemantictypes.
Poss-ingVGerPs,likeNPs,havenominalsemantics,withanindexspeci ed
forperson,number,andgender. Incontrast,acc-ingVGerPs,likeSs,have
propositionalsemantics.
Anotherdi erencebetweenthetwotypesofVGerPspointedoutbyAbney(1987)
isthatposs-ingbutnotacc-ingVGerPswithwhsubjectscanfrontunder
‘piedpiping’:
(16) Thisisthereporterwhose/*who(m)winningthePulitzerPrizesurprised
Sandy.
Again,thesamecontrastcanbeseenbetweenNPsandSs:
(17) a. ThisisthereporterwhosesuccesssurprisedSandy.
b.*ThisisthereporterforwhomtowinthePulitzerPrizesurprised
Sandy.
Hereagainisaninstancewhereposs-ingVGerPspatternmorelikeNPswhile
acc-ingVGerPspatternlikeSs.However,itishardtoseehowthisdi erence
canbeattributedtoadi erenceinthesemanticsofthetwotypesofgerund
phrases. Instead,whatthisevidenceshowsisthatatsomepurelysyntactic
level poss-ingVGerPshavesomethingincommonwithNPswhileacc-ing
VGerPshavesomethingincommonwithSs.
2 HPSGpreliminaries
AnidealanalysisofverbalgerundsinEnglishwouldbeabletoaccountfor
theirmixedverbal/nominalpropertieswithouttheadditionofotherwiseun-
motivatedmechanisms.RecentworkinConstructionGrammar(FillmoreandKaytoappear)
andHead-drivenPhraseStructureGrammar(PollardandSag1994)provide
thefoundationforsuchananalysis.Sag(toappear)proposesanelaboration
oftheHPSGX-bartheorytoincludehierarchicallyclassi edphrasestructure
rules. Underthisview,theinternalstructureofaphraseisdeterminedby
boththelexicalpropertiesoftheheadandbytheconstructiontypeofwhich
thephraseisaninstance.Inthissection,Iwillpresentabriefoverviewofthe
relevantfeaturesofSag’s(toappear)hierarchyofphrasetypes.
InHPSG,wordsandphrasesaretakentobetypesofsigns,\structured
complexesofphonological,syntactic,semantic,discourse,andphrasestruc-
turalinformation"(PollardandSag1994:15).Signsarerepresentedbytyped
featurestructures,andthegrammarofalanguageisrepresentedasasetof
constraintsontypesofsigns. Thesesigntyp