Optimization via syntactic amalgam: Syntax-prosody mismatch and copula doubling

Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory

Volumn 1, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 45-88

  Brenier, Jason M ^a   Michaelis, Laura A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750954378     PISSN: 16137027     EISSN: 16137035     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/cllt.2005.1.1.45     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Boersma, Paul and D. J. M. Weenink 1992-1999 Praat: A System for doing Phonetics by Computer. http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/praat/
2. Bolinger, Dwight 1972 Accent is predictable (if you're a mind reader). Language 48, 633-644
3. Bouma, Gosse, Robert Malouf, and Ivan A. Sag 2001 Satisfying constraints on extraction and adjunction. Natural Language and Linguistic Iheory 19, 1-65.
4. Bremer, Jason 2002 A study of the relations between grammatical and intonation units in spontaneous conversational speech. Unpublished manuscript, University of Colorado at Boulder.
5. Bybee, Joan 2001 Phonology and Language Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Chafe, Wallace 1987 Cognitive constraints on information flow. In Tomlin, R. (ed.), Coherence and Grounding in Discourse. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 21-51.
7. Croft, William 1995 Intonation units and grammatical structure. Linguistics 33, 839-82.
8. Du Bois, John 1987 The discourse basis of ergativity. Language 63, 805-855.
9. Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay, and Mary Catherine O'Connor 1988 Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64, 501-538.
10. Francis, Hartwell S., Michelle L. Gregory and Laura A. Michaelis 1999 Are lexical subjects deviant? In Billings, Sabrina J., John P. Boyle and Aaron M. Griffith (eds.), Papers from the Thirty-Fifth Annual Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, CLS 35 (1), 85-98.
11. Godfrey, J., E. Holliman, and J. McDaniel 1992 SWITCHBOARD: Telephone Speech Corpus for Research and Development. International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing 92, 517-520.
12. Goldberg, Adele 1995 Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
13. Gregory, Michelle 2000 Linguistic Informativeness and Speech Production: An Investigation of Contextual and Discourse-Pragmatic Effects on Phonological Variation. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Department of Linguistics, University of Colorado at Boulder.
14. Gundel, Jeanette K., Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski 1993 Referring expressions in discourse. Language 69, 274-307.
15. Hedberg, Nancy 1990 The Discourse Function of Cleft Sentences in English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota.
16. Jansen, Wouter, Michelle L. Gregory, and Jason M. Brenier 2001 Prosodic correlates of directly reported speech: Evidence from conversational speech. In Bacchiani, M" J. Hirschberg, D. Litman, and M. Ostendorf (eds.), Proceedings of the International Speech Communication Association Tutorial and Research Workshop on Prosody in Speech Recognition and Understanding, Redbank, NJ: ISCA, 77-80.
17. Kay, Paul and Charles J. Fillmore 1999 Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The what's X doing Y construction. Language 75, 1-33.
18. Ladd, D. Robert 1996 Intonational Phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Lambrecht, Knud 1988 There was a farmer had a dog: Syntactic amalgams revisited. In Axmaker, S., A. Jaisser, and H. Singmaster (eds.), The Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. Berkeley, CA: BLS, 319-339. 1994 Information Structure and Sentence Form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
20. Lambrecht, Knud and Laura A. Michaelis 1998 Sentence accent in information questions: Default and projection. Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 477-544.
21. Lehmann, Hana Martin 2002 Zero-Subject Relative Constructions in American and British English. In Peters, P., P. Collins, and A. Smith (eds.), New Frontiers in Corpus Research. Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi, 163-177.
22. Marcus, Mitchell, Beatrice Santorini and May Ann Marcinkiewicz 1993 Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics 19, 313-330.
23. Massam, Diane 1999 Tiling is constructions: The thing is, is what's the right analysis? English Language and Linguistics 3, 335-352.
24. Mc Convell, Patrick 1988 To be or double be? Current changes in the English copula. Australian Journal of Linguistics 8, 287-305.
25. Michaelis, Laura A. 1994 A case of constructional polysemy in Latin. Studies in Language 18, 45-70.
26. Michaelis, Laura A. and Knud Lambrecht 1996 Toward a construction-based theory of language function: The case of nominal extraposition. Language 72, 215-47.
27. Michaelis, Laura A. and Josef Ruppenofer 2001 Beyond Alternations: A Constructional Analysis of the Applicative Pattern in German. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
28. Michaelis, Laura A. and Hartwell S. Francis forthc. Lexical Subjects and the Conflation Strategy. In Hedberg, N. and R. Zacharski (eds.), Topics in the Grammar-Pragmatics Interface: Papers in Honor of Jeanette K. Gundel. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
29. Neeleman, Ad and Tanya Reinhart 1998 Scrambling and the PF interface. In Geuder.W. and M. Butt (eds.), The Projection of Argument Structure. Stanford.CA: CSLI Publications, 309-353.
30. Ono, Tsuyoshi and Sandra A. Thompson 1995 What can conversation tell us about syntax? In Davis, Philip W. (ed.), Alternative Linguistics: Descriptive and Theoretical Modes. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins, 213-271.
31. Pan, Shimei and Julia Hirschberg 2000 Modeling local context for pitch accent prediction. In Hyman, Larry (ed.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Eigth Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Hong Kong: Association for Computational Linguistics, 15-70.
32. Pan, Shimei and Kathleen McKeown 1999 Word informativeness and automatic pitch accent modeling. In Fung, Pascale and Joe Zhov (eds.), Proceedings of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing I Very Large Corpora 1999. College Park: Maryland, 148-158.
33. Pollard, Carl and Ivan A. Sag 1994 Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
34. Prince, Ellen 1978 A comparison of whclefts and it-clefts in discourse. Language 54, 883-906.
35. 1981 Toward a new taxonomy for given-new information. In Cole, Peter (ed.), Radical Pragmatics. New York, NY: Academic Press, 223-255.
36. Sag, Ivan A., Paul Kay, Charles J. Fillmore and Laura A. Michaelis 2004 Some nominal constructions of English. Unpublished manuscript, Stanford University, University of California, Berkeley, and University of Colorado at Boulder.
37. Silverman, K., M. Beckman, J. Pitrelli, M. Ostendorf, C. Wightman, P. Price, J. Pierrehumbert, and J. Hirschberg 1992 ToBI: A standard for labeling English prosody. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Spoken Language Processing 1992, vol. 2. Alberta: ISCA, 867-870.
38. Steedman, Mark 2001 Information structure and the syntax-prosody interface. Linguistic Inquiry 31, 649-689.
39. Terken, J. and D. Hermes 2000 The perception of prosodic prominence. In Horne, M. (ed.), Prosody: Theory and Experiment. Studies Presented to Gösta Bruce. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 89-127.
40. Thompson, Sandra A. and Anthony Mulac 1991 A quantitative perspective on the grammaticization of epistemic parentheticals in English. In Traugott, Elizabeth C. and Bernd Heine (eds.), Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 2. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 313-329.
41. Tuggy, David 1996 The thing is is that people talk that way. The question is is why?. In Casad, Eugene H. (ed.), Cognitive Linguistics in the Redwoods: Ihe Expansion of a New Paradigm in Linguistics. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 713-52.
42. Watson, Duane and Edward Gibson 2003 Making sense of the Sense Unit Condition. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester.
43. Wasow, Tom 2002 Postverbal Behavior. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
44. Weinert, Regina and Jim Miller 1996 Cleft constructions in spoken language. Journal of Pragmatics 25, 173-206.
45. Zwicky, Arnold 1995 Exceptional degree markers: A puzzle in internal and external syntax. In Dowty, David, Rebecca Herman, Elizabeth Hume, and Panayiotis A. Pappas (eds.), Ohio State Working Papers in Linguistics 47, 111-123.
46. 2002 Seeds of variation and change. Paper presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation NWAV 31, Stanford University.