Advertisement

Agreement and Cliticization in Italian: A Pregroup Analysis

  • Claudia Casadio
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6031)

Abstract

This paper presents an analysis of features specification and agreement based on the parallel computations of a type calculus involving two pregroups grammars: the free pregroup of syntactic types that takes care of the syntactic calculations, and a second free pregroup computing feature operations. As recently argued in [19] , working with two free pregroups in parallel has the advantage of treating featural information more carefully and independently from the type assignments; the calculus is therefore particularly appropriate for the analysis of agreement properties in Romance languages. In the paper we focus on the Italian language, introducing a type syntax of the verbal constructions in which clitic pronouns occur and offering an explanation of the interaction between agreement features and clitic pronouns.

Keywords

Declarative Sentence Past Participle Italian Language Auxiliary Verb Double Clitic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abrusci, M.: Classical conservative extensions of Lambek calculus. Studia Logica 71, 277–314 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barr, M.: On subgroups of the Lambek pregroup. Theory and Application of Categories 12(8), 262–269 (2004)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buszkowski, W.: Lambek grammars based on pregroups. In: de Groote, P., Morrill, G., Retoré, C. (eds.) LACL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2099, pp. 95–109. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Buszkowski, W.: Pregroups: Models and grammars. In: de Swart, H. (ed.) RelMiCS 2001. LNCS, vol. 2561, pp. 35–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buszkowski, W.: Type logics and pregroups. Studia Logica 87(2-3), 145–169 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Casadio, C.: Non-commutative linear logic in linguistics. Grammars 4(3), 167–185 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Casadio, C.: Applying pregroups to Italian statements and questions. Studia Logica 87, 253–268 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Casadio, C., Lambek, J.: An algebraic analysis of clitic pronouns in Italian. In: de Groote, P., Morrill, G., Retoré, C. (eds.) LACL 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2099, pp. 110–124. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Casadio, C., Lambek, J.: A tale of four grammars. Studia Logica 71(2), 315–329 (2002)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Casadio, C., Lambek, J. (eds.): Recent Computational Algebraic Approaches to Morphology and Syntax. Polimetrica, Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chomsky, N.: Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris, Dordrecht (1981)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Klavans, J.L.: Some Problems in a Theory of Clitics. Indiana Ling. Club, Bloomington (1982)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kusalik, T.: Product pregroups as an alternative to inflectors. In: Casadio, C., Lambek, J. (eds.) Recent Computational Algebraic Approaches to Morphology and Syntax, pp. 173–190. Polimetrica, Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lambek, J.: The mathematics of sentence structure. American Math. Monthly 65, 154–169 (1958)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lambek, J.: Type grammar revisited. In: Lecomte, A., Perrier, G., Lamarche, F. (eds.) LACL 1997. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1582, pp. 1–27. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lambek, J.: Type grammar meets German word order. Theoretical Linguistics 26, 19–30 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lambek, J.: A computational algebraic approach to English grammar. Syntax 7(2), 128–147 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lambek, J.: From word to sentence: a pregroup analysis of the object pronoun who(m). Journal of Logic, Language and Information 16, 303–323 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lambek, J.: Exploring feature agreement in French with parallel pregroup computations. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 19(1), 75–88 (2010)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Monachesi, P.: A Grammar of Italian Clitics. ITK Dissertation Series, Tilburg (1995)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moortgat, M.: Categorical type logics. In: van Benthem, J., ter Meulen, A. (eds.) Handbook of Logic and Language, pp. 93–177. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Preller, A., Lambek, J.: Free compact 2-categories. Math. Structures for Comp. Sciences 17, 309–340 (2007)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Preller, A., Prince, V.: Pregroup grammars with linear parsing of the French verb phrase. In: Casadio, C., Lambek, J. (eds.) Recent Computational Algebraic Approaches to Morphology and Syntax, pp. 53–84. Polimetrica, Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stabler, E.P.: Tupled pregroup grammars. In: Casadio, C., Lambek, J. (eds.) Recent Computational Algebraic Approaches to Morphology and Syntax, pp. 23–52. Polimetrica, Milan (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wanner, D.: The Development of Romance Clitic Pronouns. In: From Latin to Old Romance. Mouton de Gruyter, Amsterdam (1987)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Zwicky, A.M., Pullum, G.K.: Cliticization vs. inflection: English n’t. Language 59(3), 502–513 (1983)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Claudia Casadio
    • 1
  1. 1.University G. D’Annunzio - Chieti 

Personalised recommendations