Practical Grammar 9: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (71 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
<font size="3"> | <font size="3"> | ||
== | == Complement Clauses == | ||
Next, we come to the exciting topic of complement (= subordinate) clauses. Here are two examples: | |||
(1) | (1) Fred thought that Lilly disappeared<br> | ||
(2) Fred asked whether Lilly disappeared | |||
There is nothing really special about these structures. As with prepositional phrases, we need | |||
# lexical items for the new verbs | |||
# lexical items for the two complementizers ''that'' and ''whether'' | |||
# two new phrase structure rules. | |||
We make the following assumptions: | |||
# ''that'' and ''whether'' belong to the part of speech C (= complementizer). | |||
# A complementizer combines with a following S to form another S. | |||
# The C and the lower S are co-heads of the upper S. | |||
# You need to add a new VP rule which allows a VP to consist of a V and an S. The S bears the GF '''COMP'''. | |||
# Complementizers have no PRED value. | |||
<span style="color: blue>Exercise 9 </span> | |||
(2) | 1. Open Grammar Grammar 9 - 2026-02-04<br> | ||
2. Implement the analysis for sentences (1)-(2) as described above.<br> | |||
3. Parse. Your output should look exactly like the output decribed in the document Exercise-9-expected-output.pdf on Olat. | |||
Note that the complementizers in (1) and (2) cannot be exchanged: | |||
(4) | (3) *Fred asked that Lilly disappeared<br> | ||
(4) *Fred thought whether Lilly disappeared | |||
The reason is that there is an incompatibility of clause type information in (3) and (4): the verb ''thought'' requires a declarative clause as its COMP, but | |||
the word ''whether'' can only head interrogative clauses. In (4), we find the opposite incompatibility. | |||
<span style="color: blue>Exercise 10 </span> | |||
1. Open your current version of Grammar Grammar 9 - 2026-02-04<br> | |||
2. Add the feature CLAUSE_TYPE to the lexical entries that need it so that (3)-(4) are not accepted by the grammar for the reasons stated above, but (1)-(2) stay grammatical.<br> | |||
3. Parse. Your output should look exactly like the output decribed in the document Exercise-9-expected-output.pdf on Olat. | |||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<font face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"> | |||
<font size="2"> | |||
<div align="center"> | <div align="center"> | ||
[[Practical_Grammar |'''Main page''']] [[Practical_Grammar_2|'''Week 2''']] [[Practical_Grammar_3|'''Week 3''']] [[Practical_Grammar_4|'''Week 4''']] [[Practical_Grammar_5|'''Week 5''']] [[Practical_Grammar_6|'''Week 6''']] [[ | [[Practical_Grammar |'''Main page''']] [[Practical_Grammar_2|'''Week 2''']] [[Practical_Grammar_3|'''Week 3''']] [[Practical_Grammar_4|'''Week 4''']] [[Practical_Grammar_5|'''Week 5''']] [[Practical_Grammar_6|'''Week 6''']] [[Practical_Grammar_7_new|'''Week 7''']] [[Practical_Grammar_8|'''Week 8''']] '''Week 9''' | ||
</div> | </div> | ||
<!-- [[Practical_Grammar_10|'''Week 10''']] [[Practical_Grammar_11|'''Week 11''']] [[Practical_Grammar_12|'''Term Paper Project''']] --> | |||
Latest revision as of 10:39, 4 February 2026
Complement Clauses
Next, we come to the exciting topic of complement (= subordinate) clauses. Here are two examples:
(1) Fred thought that Lilly disappeared
(2) Fred asked whether Lilly disappeared
There is nothing really special about these structures. As with prepositional phrases, we need
- lexical items for the new verbs
- lexical items for the two complementizers that and whether
- two new phrase structure rules.
We make the following assumptions:
- that and whether belong to the part of speech C (= complementizer).
- A complementizer combines with a following S to form another S.
- The C and the lower S are co-heads of the upper S.
- You need to add a new VP rule which allows a VP to consist of a V and an S. The S bears the GF COMP.
- Complementizers have no PRED value.
Exercise 9
1. Open Grammar Grammar 9 - 2026-02-04
2. Implement the analysis for sentences (1)-(2) as described above.
3. Parse. Your output should look exactly like the output decribed in the document Exercise-9-expected-output.pdf on Olat.
Note that the complementizers in (1) and (2) cannot be exchanged:
(3) *Fred asked that Lilly disappeared
(4) *Fred thought whether Lilly disappeared
The reason is that there is an incompatibility of clause type information in (3) and (4): the verb thought requires a declarative clause as its COMP, but the word whether can only head interrogative clauses. In (4), we find the opposite incompatibility.
Exercise 10
1. Open your current version of Grammar Grammar 9 - 2026-02-04
2. Add the feature CLAUSE_TYPE to the lexical entries that need it so that (3)-(4) are not accepted by the grammar for the reasons stated above, but (1)-(2) stay grammatical.
3. Parse. Your output should look exactly like the output decribed in the document Exercise-9-expected-output.pdf on Olat.