An essay on grammar-parser relations

목차 (Table of Contents)

• CONTENTS
• Acknowledgements = xi
• Preface = 1
• Chapter 1: The Relation Grammar-Parser = 5
• 1.1 Introduction = 5
• 1.2 The legitimacy of the competence-performance distinction = 6
• 1.2.1 The mentalistic approach = 6
• 1.2.2 Marr (1982) = 7
• 1.3 The competence-performance distinction and the concept of psychological reality = 14
• 1.3.1 The common enterprise = 14
• 1.3.2 Grammar-parser correspondences = 16
• 1.3.2.1 I/O Correspondence = 16
• 1.3.2.2 Degenerate I/O Correspondence = 19
• 1.3.2.3 Strong Equivalence = 21
• 1.3.2.4 Covering Equivalence = 22
• 1.3.2.5 Metastrong Equivalence = 22
• 1.3.2.6 Overview = 23
• 1.4 A historical survey = 24
• 1.4.1 The Derivational Theory of Complexity = 24
• 1.4.2 Lexical Functional Grammar = 26
• 1.4.3 Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar = 28
• 1.4.4 Performance grammars = 30
• 1.4.5 Parsifal (Marcus 1980) = 32
• 1.5 The relation grammar-parser and so-called functional explanations = 33
• 1.5.1 Fodor's(1985) classification of functional explanations = 33
• 1.5.2 Explanations of properties of the competence level at the algorithmic level: efficiency and strategy = 35
• 1.5.3 Explanations of properties of the competence and algorithmic levels at the hardware level = 37
• 1.6 Conclusion = 37
• Chapter 2: Explaining Subjacency: An Overview = 39
• 2.1 Introduction = 39
• 2.2 The Marcus parser = 40
• 2.2.1 The Determinism Hypothesis = 40
• 2.2.2 The data structures = 42
• 2.2.3 The process structure = 45
• 2.2.3.1 Pattern-action rules = 46
• 2.2.3.2 The primitive actions = 47
• 2.2.3.3 Three types of rules = 48
• 2.2.4 An example parse = 50
• 2.3 Some apparent counterexamples to lookahead = 54
• 2.3.1 Parsing with assertion sets = 55
• 2.3.2 Some constructions claimed to be incompatible with lookahead = 59
• 2.3.2.1 Lookahead and the structure of NPs = 59
• 2.3.2.2 Frazier and Rayner's (1982) reading experiment = 61
• 2.3.2.3 Short garden paths = 64
• 2.4 Some suggestions for a theory of the buffer = 66
• 2.5 Berwick and Weinberg's modified Marcus parser = 67
• 2.6 Formal properties of the Marcus parser: LR(k), BCP(rn,n), and LRRL(k) grammars = 69
• 2.7 LRRL(k) parsing and functional explanation = 73
• 2.7.1 Berwick and Weinberg's functional explanation of Subjacency = 73
• 2.7.2 A critical examination: LRRL(k) parsing and restricted annotation = 75
• 2.7.3 Why GPSG combined with LRRL(k) parser explains Subjacency as well = 78
• 2.7.4 Summary of results = 80
• 2.8 Van de Koot (1987): barriers and determinism = 80
• 2.8.1 Some basic properties of the Barriers framework = 81
• 2.8.2 A review of the island violations = 88
• 2.8.3 L-marking as a constraint on immediate attachment = 90
• 2.8.4 Criticism = 95
• 2.9 Summary = 96
• Chapter 3: Grammatical Constraints and Determinism = 97
• 3.1 Preview = 97
• 3.2 LRRL(k) parsing and locality in chains = 99
• 3.2.1 The analysis of wh-movement = 99
• 3.2.2 Traces versus features: antecedent government = 99
• 3.2.3 Towards a generalized condition on chain links: wh-islands = 102
• 3.2.4 Adjunction and grammar size = 107
• 3.3 Deterministic chain formation = 108
• 3.3.1 Introduction = 108
• 3.3.2 Adjunct attachment as a last resort strategy = 108
• 3.3.3 Licensing the creation of covert categories in A'-position = 113
• 3.3.4 The form and interpretation of adjunct-operator chains = 117
• 3.3.5 Why the insertion of empty operators must be antecedent-dependent = 118
• 3.3.6 Extraction from adjuncts and adjunct parasitic gaps = 120
• 3.3.7 Extraction from subjects and subject parasitic gaps = 122
• 3.3.8 Extraction from objects and the non-existence of object parasitic gaps = 123
• 3.3.9 Licensing the creation of traces in A-positions = 124
• 3.3.10 Why parasitic gaps cannot be licensed by a wh-trace in subject position = 129
• 3.4 Summary of results = 131
• Chapter 4. Epilogue = 133
• 4.1 Summary = 133
• 4.2 Conclusions: The Relation Grammar-Parser Revisited = 135
• Bibliography = 141
• Index = 147
• Samenvatting = 153
• Curriculum Vitae = 157