1887
The Structure of the English NP
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Loose appositional constructions consist of coreferring adjacent nominals. The relation between the nominals is different from complementation and modification, and shows some intriguing syntactic, semantic and pragmatic characteristics. To model them we employ the framework of Sign-Based Construction Grammar, enriching its inventory of constructions with a highly abstract one that models supplementation in general, and a more specific one that models the loose appositional construction.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.1.02kim
2016-06-09
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Acuña-Fariña, Juan Carlos
    1999 On apposition. English Language and Linguistics3(1). 59–81. doi: 10.1017/S1360674399000131
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674399000131 [Google Scholar]
  2. 2009 Aspects of the grammar of close apposition and the structure of the noun phrase. English Language and Linguistics13(3). 453–481. doi: 10.1017/S1360674309990190
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674309990190 [Google Scholar]
  3. Allegranza, Valerio
    2007The signs of determination. Constraint-based modelling across languages. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Amaral, Patricia , Craige Roberts & Allyn Smith
    2007 Review of “The logic of conventional implicatures” by Chris Potts. Linguistics and Philosophy30(6). 707–749. doi: 10.1007/s10988‑008‑9025‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-008-9025-2 [Google Scholar]
  5. Boas, Hans C. & Ivan A. Sag
    (eds.) 2012Sign-based construction grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Burton-Roberts, Noel
    1975 Nominal apposition. Foundations of Language13. 391–419.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Delorme, Evelyne & Ray Dougherty
    1972 Appositive NP constructions: we, the men; we men; I, a man; Etc. Foundations of Language8(1). 2–29.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria & Edwin Williams
    1987On the definition of word. Cambridge: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Fillmore, Charles & Collin Baker
    2010 A frames approach to semantic description. In Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis, 313–339. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Fodor, Janet D. & Ivan A. Sag
    1982 Referential and quantificational indefinites. Linguistics and Philosophy5(3). 355–398. doi: 10.1007/BF00351459
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00351459 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ginzburg, Jonathan & Ivan A. Sag
    2000Interrogative investigations. The form, meaning and use of English interrogatives. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Harris, Jesse A. & Christopher Potts
    2009 Perspective-shifting with appositives and expressives. Linguistics and Philosophy32(6). 523–552. doi: 10.1007/s10988‑010‑9070‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-010-9070-5 [Google Scholar]
  13. Heringa, Herman
    2011Appositional constructions (LOT Dissertation Series 294). Groningen: University of Groningen PhD thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. 2012 A multidominance approach to appositional constructions. Lingua122(6). 554–581. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.07.003 [Google Scholar]
  15. Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey Pullum
    2002The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: CUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Kamp, Hans & Uwe Reyle
    1993From discourse to logic. Introduction to modeltheoretic semantics of natural language, formal logic and discourse representation theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Keizer, Evelien
    2005 The discourse function of close appositions. Neophilologus89. 447–467. doi: 10.1007/s11061‑004‑0963‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11061-004-0963-9 [Google Scholar]
  18. Kim, Jong-Bok
    2012 Form and function mismatch in the English appositional construction. Language Research48(3). 1–23.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Loock, Rudy & Kathleen M. O’Connor
    2013 The discourse functions of nonverbal appositives. Journal of English Linguistics41(4). 332–358. doi: 10.1177/0075424213502236
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424213502236 [Google Scholar]
  20. Meyer, Charles
    1987 Apposition in English. Journal of English Linguistics20(1). 101–121. doi: 10.1177/007542428702000107
    https://doi.org/10.1177/007542428702000107 [Google Scholar]
  21. Potts, Chris
    2005The logic of conventional implicatures. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2007 Conventional implicatures: A distinguished class of meanings. In Gillian Ramchand & Charles Reiss (eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic interfaces, 475–501. Oxford: OUP.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Quirk, Randolph , Sidney Greenbaum , Geoffry Leech & Jan Svartvik
    1985A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Sag, Ivan A
    2012 Sign-based construction grammar: An informal synopsis. In Hans C. Boas & Ivan A. Sag (eds.), Sign-based construction grammar,69–202.
  25. Saussure, Ferdinand de
    1916Cours de linguistique générale. Genève: Payot.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Van Eynde, Frank
    2006 NP-internal agreement and the structure of the noun phrase. Journal of Linguistics42(1). 139–186. doi: 10.1017/S0022226705003713
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226705003713 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2015Predicative constructions. From the Fregean to a Montagovian treatment. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/fol.23.1.02kim
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error