Transcript Complement Structures Equi and Raising

Complement Structures:
Equi and Raising
HPSG WS 2007/08
Janina Kopp
20.12.2007
Outline




About Equi and Raising Constructions
About Equi and Raising in HPSG
Expletive pronoun constructions
(Raising Expletives)
What are Equi and Raising
Constructions?

Consider the following two sentence pairs:





They tend to run
They try to run
John believes Mary to own Fido
John persuades Mary to own Fido
On the first sight, the underlying structure looks
just the same, however, there is a crucial
difference.
Motivation and Distinction
Tests


We will now see what evidence there is for
assuming two different underlying structures
These differences can be used to distinguish such
constructions
Comparison

They try to run



They tend to run



tend: raising verb
they is agent argument only of run, not of tend
John persuaded Mary to own Fido



try: subject control verb or equi verb
they is agent argument of both try and run
persuade: object control verb
Mary is direct object of persuaded, but semantically both patient of
persuaded and agent of to own Fido
John believed Mary to own Fido


believe: object raising verb
Mary is the direct object of believed and subject of to own Fido
Test 1: passivization

Think about how the meaning of these
sentences changes:




(1a) John believed Mary to own Fido
(1b) John believed Fido to be owned by Mary
(2a) John persuaded Mary to own Fido
(2b) John persuaded Fido to be owned by Mary
 in (1), both sentences have the same meaning
 in (2a), Mary is the persuadee, while in (2b) it is Fido
Test 2: insertion of verbal
adjuncts


John persuaded Mary firmly to own Fido
*John believed Mary firmly/honestly to own Fido
Test 3: paraphrasing




(1) John persuaded Mary to own Fido
(1’) John persuaded Mary that she should own
Fido
(2) John believed Mary to own Fido
(2’) John believed that Mary owned Fido

persuade: three-place-predicate:


Subject John, Primary Object Mary, Secondary Object [that
she should own Fido]
believe: two-place-predicate:

Subject John, Object [that Mary owned Fido]
Test 4: complement omission




John persuaded/told/convinced Mary to own
Fido, but I don’t think he has persuaded/told/
convinced Sandy yet.
*John believed/expected/reported Mary to own
Fido, but I don’t think he has believed/expected/
reported Sandy.
They try/refuse/hope to run, but I don’t think that
you try/refuse/hope.
*They tend/continue/happen to run, but I don’t
think that you tend/continue/happen.
Test 5: there as a complement

There with subject raising verbs:




There with object raising verbs:


There tends to be disorder after a revolution.
There seems to be some misunderstanding.
There kept being problems with the analysis.
Kim believed there to be some misunderstanding.
Compare with corresponding equi constructions:



*There tries to be disorder after a revolution.
*There hopes to be some misunderstanding.
*Kim persuaded there to be some misunderstanding.
Realization in HPSG

a. They try to run.
b. They tend to run.
More on semantic roles

Equi controllers are assigned semantic roles:






(101)
a. The doctor tried to examine Sandy.
 TRYER: doctor
b. Sandy tried to be examined by the doctor.
 TRYER: Sandy
(102)
a. Kim persuaded the doctor to examine Sandy.
 PERSUADEE: the doctor
b. Kim persuaded Sandy to be examined by the doctor.
 PERSUADEE: Sandy
More on semantic roles

However:




(103)
a. Kim believed the doctor to have examined Sandy
b. Kim believed Sandy to have been examined by the
doctor
The raising controller does not have a semantic role in
“believe”. We only have a SOA-ARG which associates
the doctor with the EXAMINER role and Sandy with
the EXAMINEE role.
Expletive it or there

Only raising constructions allow expletive it or
there as a complement:









There tends to be disorder after a revolution.
Kim believed there to be some misunderstanding.
*There tries to be disorder after a revolution.
*Kim persuaded there to be some misunderstanding.
It tends to be warm in September
Lee believes it to bother Kim that Sandy snores.
*It tries to be warm in September
*Lee persuades it to bother Kim that Sandy snores.
An equi controller has to be of sort ref.
SUBCAT list of persuade:
SUBCAT list of believe:
More examples on expletive it

Kim persuades it to run


Kim persuades it to rain



it is of sort it
ungrammatical
Kim believes it to run


it is of sort ref
it is of sort ref
Kim believes it to rain

it is of sort it
Shared information

The unexpressed subject of the VP complement
is identified with



equi controller’s index in equi verbs
raising controller’s SYNSEM value in raising verbs
Examples of Icelandic:

raising controllers in Icelandic share CASE values with
the unexpressed subjects of unsaturated
complements.
Raising Principle

Let E be a lexical entry whose SUBCAT list L
contains an element X not specified as expletive.
Then X is lexically assigned no semantic role in the
content of E if and only if L also contains a
(nonsubject) Y[SUBCAT <X>].



this is only a constraint on lexical entries
follows from the generalization that unassigned arguments
must be raising controllers
unassigned arguments can only be on the SUBCAT list if
there is a corresponding unsaturated phrase
More on complement omission


persuaded
They
told
Jan to leave,
convinced
persuaded
but I don’t think they have
told
Sandy yet.
convinced
seems
*Taylor tends to be obnoxious,
seems
but I don’t think that Gerry tends.
More on complement omission

p. 141: “Removing the unsaturated complement
from a raising verb’s SUBCAT list would leave a
semantically unassigned SUBCAT element that
was not raised.”


 there is no “TENDER” (subject raising) or
“BELIEVEE” (object raising)
NP substitution:


(122) Leslie tried something.
(123) *Whitney tends something.
 tends assigns no semantic role to its subject, Whitney, so
there must be an unsaturated complement on the
SUBCAT list. Something, though, is already saturated.
Auxiliary element to

to is treated as a verb in HPSG, and more
explicitly, as a raising verb
Summary Equi/Raising

raising verbs




fail to assign a semantic role to one of their dependents
the entire SYNSEM value of the SUBCAT list element of
the VP complement is structure shared with the raising
controller
allows it and there as a complement
equi verbs


only the INDEX of the VP complement’s subject is structure
shared with the equi controller
controllers are assigned semantic roles
Expletive pronoun
constructions

We already saw that the sort there or it is inappropriate for
NP dependents that are assigned a semantic role:





environments subcategorizing for there:


*There died.
*We like there very much.
*It died.
*We talked to it. (it not being a ppro)
subject of copula (be, is), with add. postcopula
environments subcategorizing for it (no ref allowed!):




weather verbs (rain, snow)
temporal expressions (late, five o’clock)
extraposed clauses (It bothers me that Sandy snores)
can also occur in the object position (“I take it that you pay”)
Expletive pronoun
constructions

be – an example (143)




CONTENT is token identical to the CONTENT of the
XP[+PRD]
The unexpressed subject of the XP[+PRD] complement is
structure shared with the postcopular NP complement
CONTENT is not determined by subject, but by the
postcopular NP and the XP element
 CONTENT is complete even before adding Subject
NPthere to the structure
NUM value of the NPthere is dependent on the postcopular
NP
Extraposition Lexical Rule

verbs/adjectives combining with an extraposed clause:




It bothers Kim that Sandy snores.
That Sandy snores bothers Kim.
The idea is to assume an underlying, basic lexical entry and
a rule that transforms its SUBCAT list.
The Extraposition Lexical Rule removes an S[comp] from a
SUBCAT list, replacing it by NPit and appends the S[comp]
to the end of the SUBCAT list.


SUBCAT<NP, S[comp], PP[to]> (explain, mention)
  SUBCAT<NP, NPit, PP[to], S[comp]>
SUBCAT<NP, S[comp]> (regret, resent)
  SUBCAT<NP, NPit, S[comp]>
Extraposition Lexical Rule

However, there are still exceptions that need to be
listed separately:


It seems that Sandy is snoring.
*That Sandy is snoring seems.
Raised Expletives