Introduction to LFG Kersti Börjars & Nigel Vincent

{k.borjars, n.vincent}@man.ac.uk

University of Manchester

Winter school in LFGJuly 4-8 2004

University of CanterburyChristchurch, New Zealand

Part 1 Basic building blocks and c-structure to f-structure mapping

Kersti Börjars

In order to make sense of this, you will need to run the presentation, it relies on animations and a printed version will not be very clear.Feel free to use it if you find it helpful, but please give source.

Types of information about linguistic units

• Syntactic structure, c-structurethe dog forms a constituent in (1)

• Functional information, f-structurethe dog is the subject in (1)(1) is in past tense

• Argument structure, a-structureeat takes two arguments

• Information structure• Phonetic structure• …

(1) The dog ate the rats.

Correspondence between dimensions

(1) The dog ate the rats.

(2) The rats were eaten by the dog.

subject

object

agent

theme

dog

ratsFunction Semantic role

subject

object

agent

theme

dog

ratsFunction Semantic role

Non-one-to-one correspondence Parallel correspondence approach

a-structure c-structure

f-structure

mapping relations

a-structure

Information relating to the thematic roles associated with a predicate

(3) a. tickle < agent, patient>b. like < experiencer, theme>

Lexical Mapping Theory maps the arguments onto f-structure.

Arguments are represented as features.

f-structure: attributes

Types of attributes:

Functional features

NUM

PERS

TENSE

…

Semantic feature PRED

Grammatical relations

SUBJ

OBJ

ADJUNCT

COMP

…

A feature value matrix: an unordered set of feature-value pair

f-structure:values

Types of values:

Atomic valueValue of the functional features: plu, past, 3, fem

Semantic form value of PRED

f-structure value of grammatical relations

f-structures are reasonably invariant across languages

f-structure:examples

€

(4)

PRED ' pro'PERS 3NUM sgGEND fem

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥

she

€

(5)

PRED 'smile SUBJ( ) '

SUBJPRED 'goal keeper'NUM sgDEF +

⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

TENSE past

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥

The goal keeper smiled.

Semantic feature

Semantic feature

Functional features

Grammatical relation

Functional feature

Sw hon

Sw Målvakten log.

c-structure

Category labelled trees

CategoriesLexical S, N, V, P, A, (Adv)

Functional C, I, D

Both endocentric (headed) and exocentric (non-headed) structures allowed

Cross linguistic variation

c-structure: functional categoriesFunctional categories are used when certain functional features are associated with positional properties

(6) a. wita-jarra-rlu ka-pala wajili-pi-nyismall-DUAL-ERG PRES-3DUSUBJ chase-NPAST

yalumpu kurdu-jarra-rlu malikithat.ABS child-DUAL-ERG dog.ABS

Warlpiri:

b. All permutations possible as long as inflectional bundle stays in second position

c. IP

I’

Ika-pala

c-structure: functional categories

(7) a. The rats will eat the dog.b. Will the rats eat the dog?

English:

Special status of auxiliary verbs:

(9) IP

I’

I

NP

VP

will

(8) a. The rats ate the dog.b. *Ate the rats the dog?

c-structure: an interlude

(10) The rats ate the dog.

Principle of Economy of Expression:all phrase structure nodes are optional unless required byindependent principles(completeness, coherence, semantic expressivity)

(11) IP

I’NP

VP

the dog

V

ate

NP

The ratsI VP

c-structure: “head to head movement”

C-structure heads are f-structure heads:Xn

X

€

↑=↓

Complements of functional categories are f-structure co-heads:

F’

XP

€

↑=↓

c-structure

(10) a. Canis rattos devoravit.dog.NOM rat.ACC.PL eat.PERF.3SG

b. all orders in possible under right information structural conditions

Latin:

Functional information on verb not associated with position, so no argument for a functional category.

(11) S

NP NP V

S

NP V NP

Etc.

Mapping between f-structure and c-structure

€

PRED 'eat SUBJ OBJ 'SUBJ PRED 'dog'[ ]OBJ PRED 'rat'[ ]TENSE past

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥

IP

I’NP

VPThe dog

NPV

ate the rats

Position: Spec-IP

Position: sister of V

Case: nominative

Case: accusativeS

NP NP V

rattos canis devoravit

S

NP NP V

canis rattos devoravit

Mapping between f-structure and c-structure

€

↑SUBJ( ) = ↓

€

↑OBJ( ) = ↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

(12) IP

I’NP

VP

The NPV

ate

dog

D N

the rats

D N€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

f1

f9

f8f7

f6f5f4

f3f2

f10

€

(13) a. IP → NP↑SUBJ( )=↓

I'↑=↓

€

I' → I↑=↓

VP↑=↓

€

VP → V↑=↓

NP↑OBJ( )=↓

€

NP → D↑=↓

N↑=↓

Basic lexical entries

the

dog

ate

rats

€

(↑ DEF) = +

€

↑PERS( ) = 3

€

↑PRED( ) = 'dog'

€

↑NUM( ) = sg

€

↑PRED( ) = 'rat'

€

↑NUM( ) = pl€

↑PRED( ) = 'eat ↑ SUBJ( ) ↑ OBJ( ) '

€

↑TENSE( ) = past

Mapping between f-structure and c-structure

€

↑DEF( ) = +↑PERS( ) = 3

€

↑PRED( ) = 'dog '↑NUM( ) = sg

f10

IP

I’NP

VP

The NPV

ate

(12)

€

↑SUBJ( ) = ↓

€

↑OBJ( ) = ↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓dog

D N

the rats

D N€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

€

↑=↓

f1

f9

f8f7

f6f5f4

f3f2

€

↑PRED( ) = 'eat ↑SUBJ( ) ↑OBJ( ) '↑TENSE( ) = past

€

↑PRED( ) = 'rat '↑NUM( ) = pl

f1 SUBJ = f2

f1 = f3

f2 = f4

f2 = f5

f3 = f6

f6 = f7

f6 OBJ = f8

f8 = f9

f8 = f10

f4 DEF = +

f5 PRED = ‘dog’

f5 NUM = sg

f7 PRED = ‘eat <SUBJ OBJ>’

f7 TENSE = past

f9 DEF = +

f10 PRED = ‘rat’

f10 NUM = pl

€

↑DEF( ) = +↑PERS( ) = 3

f4 PERS = 3

f9 PERS = 3

Mapping between f-structure and c-structure

€

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥

€

SUBJ ⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

f1

f2

f3

f4 f5€

DEF +

€

PRED 'dog'

€

NUM sg

€

OBJ ⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

€

DEF +

€

PRED 'rat '

€

NUM plf8 f9 f10

f7f6

€

PRED 'eat SUBJ OBJ '

€

TENSE past

f7 PRED = ‘eat <SUBJ OBJ>’

f1 SUBJ = f2

f1 = f3

f2 = f4

f2 = f5

f3 = f6

f6 = f7

f6 OBJ = f8

f8 = f9

f9 = f10

f4 DEF = +

f5 PRED = ‘dog’

f5 NUM = sg

f7 TENSE = past

f9 DEF = +

f10 PRED = ‘rat’

f10 NUM = pl

Well-formedness conditions on f-structure

€

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥

€

SUBJ ⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

€

DEF +

€

PRED 'dog'

€

NUM sg

€

OBJ ⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

€

DEF +

€

PRED 'rat '

€

NUM pl

€

PRED 'eat SUBJ OBJ '

€

TENSE past

Completeness condition:

Coherence condition:

(i) all argument functions specified in the value of the PRED feature must be present in the local f-structure, (ii) all arguments so specified must have a PRED value.

(i) all argument functions in an f-structure must be specified by their local PRED, (ii) all functions which have a PRED value must be arguments of the element which specifies them.

Functional uniqueness:

Any attribute has only one value

Well-formedness conditions on f-structure

(14) a. *Oscar tickled.

b. *Oscar tickled Sarah the dog’s tummy.

c. *The sky rained.

Incomplete

Incoherent

Incoherent

Well-formedness conditions on f-structure

(14) d. *Tickles her.

e. tickles

€

↑PRED = 'tickle ↑ SUBJ ↑ OBJ '

€

↑TENSE = npast

€

↑SUBJ NUM = sg

€

↑SUBJ PERS = 3

f.

€

PRED ' tickle SUBJ OBJTENSE npast ⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥

€

OBJPRED 'proi 'GEND fem... ...

⎡

⎣ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦ ⎥ ⎥

€

SUBJNUM sgPERS 3 ⎡ ⎣ ⎢

⎤ ⎦ ⎥

Coherent? Yes

Complete?

No, cf (ii), no PRED value for SUBJ

Well-formedness conditions on f-structure

(14) g. *They tickles her.

h. tickles

€

↑PRED = 'tickle ↑ SUBJ ↑ OBJ '

€

↑SUBJ NUM = sg

f.

€

PRED ' tickle SUBJ OBJTENSE npast

SUBJPRED ' proi 'NUM sg & pl ⎡ ⎣ ⎢

⎤ ⎦ ⎥

OBJPRED ' pro j 'NUM sg ⎡ ⎣ ⎢

⎤ ⎦ ⎥

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥

Functional uniqueness violated

i. they

€

↑NUM = pl

j.

€

IP → NP↑SUBJ=↓

I'↑=↓

c-structure: back to Latin

(10) a. Canis rattos devoravit.dog.NOM rat.ACC.PL eat.PERF.3SG

b. all orders in possible under right information structural conditions

(11) S

NP NP V

S

NP V NP

Etc.

Morphology builds f-structure:

€

↓CASE( ) = nom ⇒ ↑ SUBJ( ) = ↓(15) a.

b.

€

↓CASE( ) = acc ⇒ ↑ OBJ( ) = ↓

c-structure: back to Latin

€

↓CASE( ) = nom ⇒ ↑ SUBJ( ) = ↓(15) a.

b.

€

↓CASE( ) = acc ⇒ ↑ OBJ( ) = ↓

(16) S

NP NP V

canis rattos devoravit

€

↑PRED = 'dog'↑CASE = nom

€

↑PRED = 'rat '↑CASE = acc€

↑SUBJ = ↓

€

↑OBJ = ↓

More on functions

Grammatical relations

SUBJ

OBJ

ADJUNCT

COMP

…

Semantic feature PRED

Functional features

NUM

PERS

TENSE

…

More on functions

Non-argumentTOP

Discourse functionFOC

Argument

Core

SUBJ

OBJ

Non-discourse function

OBJ

Non-coreOBL

COMP

Non-argument ADJUNCT

Discourse functions

(17) a. Beans, I like.FOCUS

€

CP → NP↑FOCUS=↓

C'↑=↓

b. In Spec-CP

c.

€

PRED 'like SUBJ OBJ 'FOCUS PRED 'beans'[ ]SUBJ PRED 'proi '[ ]

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥

€

↑FOCUS =↑ OBJ

€

OBJ

€

↑DF =↑ GF

Incomplete?

Complete

Functional uncertainty

COMP function

(18) a. Oscar claimed that he liked LFG.

b. claim

€

↑PRED( ) = 'claim ↑ SUBJ( ) ↑ COMP( ) '

c.

€

VP → V↑=↓

CP↑COMP=↓

VP

V CP

claimed that he liked LFG€

↑=↓

€

↑COMP = ↓

€

PRED 'claim SUBJ OBJ 'SUBJ PRED 'Oscar'[ ]

COMP

PRED 'like SUBJ OBJ '

SUBJ PRED ' pro '[ ]OBJ PRED ' LFG'[ ]

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥

TENSE past

⎡

⎣

⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢ ⎢

⎤

⎦

⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥ ⎥

OBJ and OBL functions

Both OBJ and OBL are argument functions which can occur in the PRED feature of a verb.

In (19a), a book is OBJ restricted to the role of theme, hence it is an OBJTHEME.

A function subscripted with a is restricted to a certain thematic role.

In English, an OBL is always a PP, whereas an OBJ is an NP.

(19) a. Oscar gave Sarah a book.b. Oscar gave a book to Sarah.

The PP to Sarah in (19b), is restricted to having a recipient role, hence it is an OBLRECIP.

OBJ function

(19) The teacher bought Sarah a book.

Sarah is OBJ a book is OBJ

• Provide the lexical entry for bought and the other words;

• Provide the phrase structure rule that is required (remember that it does not have to be binary branching);

• Add annotations to the phrase structure rule;

• Draw the tree using the new rule and the ones we have used in the class;

• Add numbered f-structure variables to each node (f1, f2, etc);

• Write down the equations and solve them to give you the correct f-structure.

Reading

The main reading for this part comes from:

Falk, Yehuda 2001. Lexical-Functional Grammar. An introduction to parallel constraint-based syntax. Stanford, Ca: CSLI Publications.

Chapters 1-3

If you want to have some additional reading, try:

Bresnan, Joan (2001) Lexical Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell. Chapters 1-4

Dalrymple, Mary (2001) Lexical Functional Grammar. [Syntax and Semantics 34]. New York: Academic Press. Chapters 1-5.