2008 SpecifyingCoordination
- (de Vries, 2008) ⇒ Mark de Vries. (2008). “Specifying Coordination: An Investigation into the Syntax of Dislocation, Extraposition and Parenthesis.” In: Language and Linguistics: Emerging Trends, ed. by Cynthia R. Dryer. New York: Nova.
Subject Headings: Linguistic Coordination, Coordinating Conjunction, Apposition.
Notes
Quotes
Abstract
Coordination is a syntactic construction with a varying semantics. I argue that besides additive, disjunctive and more specialized kinds of coordination, there is another main type, namely one that can be characterized as specification. Grammatical configurations involving specifying coordination can be found at diverse levels of sentence structure. This provides an new perspective on a range of syntactic phenomena, such as apposition, parenthesis, left- and right-dislocation, and extraposition. Certainly, all these constructions are different, and they have been studied before in isolation – but they also have properties in common. I propose a basic typology in terms of four independent factors: restrictiveness, anchoring, backgrounding, and place of attachment. A common problem for the analysis of non-restrictive material is that it is a priori unclear how to incorporate such phrases and clauses in the host structure, since the syntactic relationship between the two cannot be expressed in terms of regular subordination, which is an automatic result of syntactic merger according to the standard view. Furthermore, several types of phrases or clauses can show up either in a dislocated position or as an intervening parenthesis, which is also unexpected from a traditional perspective. These problems can be solved by means of the particular mode of construal discussed in this chapter, specifying coordination, which is then divided into two kinds: i) restrictive specifying coordination, which can be used to explain extraposition, ii) non-restrictive (parenthetical) specifying coordination, which triggers a secondary message (a proposition if the parenthesis is anchored). Thus, it is shown that superficially very different syntactic constructions make use of the same abstract mechanisms.
1 Introduction
Typical examples of coordination involve the combination of comparable constituents by means of the coordinative conjunctions and or or. Evidently, the meaning of these two central coordinators is different, which already suggests that coordination is a syntactic construction with a varying semantics. This idea will be confirmed in section 2, where a typology of coordinators is presented. With this as a background, I will argue in this chapter that there is another main type of coordination, namely specifying coordination.
The most transparent form of specifying coordination is found in the (non-restrictive) appositional construction. Examples are my best friend, John or my neighbor, a nice guy. Here, two comparable phrases are combined; the second can be understood as a specification or explication of the first. As far as I know, Kraak & Klooster (1968) were the first to subsume appositions under coordination. The similarities between standard coordination and apposition were also stressed in Quirk et al. (1985) and Sturm (1986). Later, Koster (2000) and Rijkhoek (1998) used the idea of specifying coordination as a construction type to explain certain properties of extraposition.
In constructing a sentence, phrases can be combined by means of coordination. This syntactic operation is extraordinarily flexible:
- Coordination can be applied at any level of syntactic structure.
- Coordination can be applied both iteratively and recursively.
- There are various coordinators, which trigger different semantic relationships between the
conjuncts.1
The first property is illustrated in (1a-c), where nouns, prepositional phrases and clauses are coordinated, respectively. The relevant constituents are put between brackets; coordinators are italicized.
- 1a. Yesterday, I bought some [spoons and forks].
- 1b. I am afraid we have mice behind the cupboard or [in the attic]].
- 1c. John is going to the cinema and [I would like to accompany him]].
The difference between iteration and layered recursion is exemplified in (2a/b). In (2a), the subject simply consists of a list of participants in the event. In (2b), however, different instances of coordination are nested, which leads to subgroups, as is indicated by the brackets.2
- 2a. [John, Paul, Mary, and Susan] are going to the cinema tonight.
- 2b. [either [John and Paul], or [Mary and Susan]] are allowed to leave the house.
Thus, coordination is a syntactic construction. The associated semantics depends on the particular coordinator that is used (regardless of whether it is overt or implicit). The central coordinators are and and or, which correspond to an additive and disjunctive relationship, respectively. Their meanings correlate with the homonymous Boolean operators.
…
,
| Author | volume | Date Value | title | type | journal | titleUrl | doi | note | year | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008 SpecifyingCoordination | Mark de Vries | Specifying Coordination: An Investigation into the Syntax of Dislocation, Extraposition and Parenthesis | Language and Linguistics: Emerging Trends | http://odur.let.rug.nl/~dvries/pdf/2008-specifying coordination.pdf | 2008 |