The two countries have suspended talks on a peace accord. (7). Plans for the ... Information Integration presupposes that P and A are sisters.1. This is a soft, per se .... between Stage Level and Individual Level Predicatesâ, in. Journal of ...
Optimal Conditions for Integration Kjell Johan Sæbø University of Oslo Szklarska Poreba Workshop 5 February – March 2004
Integration (Jacobs 1993) Informational Nonautonomy (Jacobs 1999) Semantic Incorporation (van Geenhoven 1996, Bende-Farkas 1999, Farkas and de Swart 2003) are different labels for more or less the same linguistic phenomenon: A predicate P and an argument A, typically a verb and its theme argument, form one informational unit.
+ I(nformational)I(ntegration): (1)
There was a raging storm such as we had never before seen.
(2)
Plans had been made for the disposal of these small objects.
(3)
A queue had formed in the area newly designated for waiting in.
(4)
Later in the evening they made a great fire on the ceremony ground.
Note the connection to theticity (Ladusaw 1994, McNally 1998, J¨ ager 2001). ÷ I(nformational)I(ntegration): (5)
A slum scheduled for demolition had been reprieved.
(6)
The two countries have suspended talks on a peace accord.
(7)
Plans for the disposal of these small objects had been rejected.
(8)
A photo had survived while oral family history had gone to the grave.
Informational Integration
1
2
II and Sisterhood
I(nformational)I(ntegration) has correlates at several levels: 1. Intonation (the verb is deaccented), 2. semantics (the verb is poor in content), 3. syntax (the verb and argument are sisters). The 2nd condition (the verb is poor in content) is vague and context sensitive, and (at least as far as I am aware) the decisive factor has yet to be identified. My concern is with the 3rd condition: P and A are sisters. Cf. Jacobs 1999: 56: Informational autonomy is a relation between heads and their sister constituents. OK: P and A are sisters in Deep Structure. This truth I hold to be self-evident. But there are signs that P and A should be sisters in Surface Structure too. Sisterhood Constraint Information Integration presupposes that P and A are sisters. 1 This is a soft, per se absolutely violable constraint. It is not penalised as long as there is no reasonably ceteris paribus alternative where P and A are sisters: (10)
a.
A wind had risen.
(11)
a.
A Jag has just passed.
(12)
a.
Bushes had been planted at intervals.
E(nglish) unaccusatives, and passives where the agent is unfamiliar. (10b) shows that if we believe the Unaccusativity Hypothesis, P and A are not sisters here: (10)
b.
A wind had risen (simplified).
Q
A wind i
Q Q
VP
Q QQ
(had) risen
ti
1. But note that finite V “movement to C” seems to be o.k., cf. the German or Norwegian translation of (1): . . . w¨ utete ein Sturm . . . / raste det en storm (raged it a storm) . . .
Informational Integration
2
3
Sisterhood begins to matter
But: As soon as there is a ceteris paribus alternative where P and A are sisters (or where A is unmoved, cf. fn. 1), this alternative seems to be preferred: (11)
b.
Det kjørte nettopp en Jag forbi. (N) it drove just a Jag past
(12)
b.
In Intervallen waren B¨ usche eingepflanzt worden. (G)
These are authentic N(orwegian) or G(erman) translations. English translations of German or Norwegian sentences seem to show the same: (13)
a. b.
Es m¨ usste Vieh gehalten werden, Rinde, Schweine und Schafe. They would have to keep animals, cattle, pigs, and sheep.
(14)
a.
Seinere ble det gjort opp store b˚ al p˚ a seremoniplassen. (N) later was it made up great fires on ceremonyground Later they made a great fire on the ceremony ground.
b.
Here the active is substituted for a passive where the agent is familiar.
3
Sisterhood tightens its grip
When there is a ceteris paribus +sisterhood alternative which presupposes II, like the presentative in E or N, this seems to be strongly preferred: (15)
a. b.
(16)
a. b.
Den kvelden ble det holdt en stor fest med b˚ al og dans. that evening was it held a great feast with fires and dance That night there was a great festival with fires and dancing. Etterp˚ a ble det servert hvitvin og kanap´eer. afterwards was it served whitewine and canap´es Afterwards there were canap´es and white wine.
Here a presentative construction with the verb be is substituted for a passive. Below, an impersonal passive or unaccusative is substituted for a personal one: (11)
c.
Det var plantet busker med store mellomrom. it was planted bushes with big intervals
(17)
a. b.
A queue had formed. Det hadde dannet seg kø. it had formed itself queue
Informational Integration 3.1
4
Negative Evidence
(18)
a.
Nach dem Willen des Bundes der Vertriebenen soll ein Mahnmal zum Gedenken an Vertreibungsopfer errichtet werden. b. ??. . . skal et minnesmerke til minne om fordrevne reises. . . . shall a memorial to memory of expelled erect-pass c. . . . skal det reises et minnesmerke til minne om fordrevne . . . shall it erect-pass a memorial to memory of expelled
(19)
a.
(20)
a.
Nach dem Willen des Bundestages soll ein europ¨ aischer Dialog u ¨ber ein europ¨ aisches Zentrum gegen Vertreibungen gef¨ uhrt werden. b. ??. . . skal en dialog om et senter mot fordrivinger føres. . . . shall a dialog on a centre against expulsions lead-pass c. . . . skal det føres en dialog om et senter mot fordrivinger . . . shall it lead-pass a dialog on a centre against expulsions
Wlodzimierz Borodziej warnte vor einem R¨ uckschritt, wenn ein auf das deutsche Leiden fixiertes Zentrum entstehe. b. ??. . . et senter fiksert p˚ a den tyske lidelsen oppst˚ ar. . . . a centre fixated on the German suffering arises c. . . . det oppst˚ ar et senter fiksert p˚ a den tyske lidelsen. . . . it arises a centre fixated on the German suffering
The b. versions, where the NP has undergone raising to subject, suggest: There is this memorial, and it is to be erected; there is this dialogue, and it is to be conducted; there is this centre, and it comes into existence. English: J¨ ager (2001: 113), citing McNally (1998), notes that while the English a. versions are bad, the German b. versions are good: (21)
a. ??Holes were in those pants. b. (weil) L¨ ocher in dieser Hose waren (because) there were holes in these pants
(22)
a. ??Dents were under the driver’s side window. b. (weil) Beulen unter dem Fenster auf der Fahrerseits waren (because) there were dents under the driver’s side window As the translations indicate, these statements are perfect in a thetic construal in English too as soon as we use there insertion. Though I have no explanation why there insertion is mandatory here, location dependence cannot be a decisive factor for theticity. (J¨ ager 2001)
We may speculate that bad sentences like (21a), (22a) are bad because they violate the sisterhood condition for II. Note, however, the formally apparently parallel (23) and our relative ignorance of the syntax of existential constructions. √ (23) A key was in the lock.
Informational Integration
4
5
A Skeletal Theory
Recall that the violation of the Sisterhood Constraint is not penalised as long as there is no ceteris paribus +sisterhood alternative. But as soon as there is such an alternative, the ÷sisterhood version becomes in varying degrees dispreferred. The way I will model it, the violation is always penalised but the penalty only takes effect if there is competition; then we get a weak or strong blocking effect. 4.1
1st Case: No Competition inf(·/·) ÷
π
^
α
+ II
÷ II
m+a
n−a
Table 1: Absolute Informativity of Informational Integration / ÷ sisterhood Whether the penalty a matters will depend on the relation between m and n. Normally there will be independent reasons for a clear difference between them. 4.2
2nd Case: Competition and Weak Preference inf(·/·) + π
÷
π
^
^
α
α
+ II
÷ II
⇒m
n
m+a
n−a
Table 2: Relative Informativity of Informational Integration / ± sisterhood Competition with an alternative compatible with ÷ Informational Integration: A weak blocking effect 4.3
3rd Case: Competition and Strong Preference inf(·/·) + π
÷
π
^
^
α
α
+ II
÷ II
⇒0
∞
m+a
n−a
Table 3: Relative Informativity of Informational Integration / ± sisterhood I Competition with an alternative which presupposes Informational Integration: A strong blocking effect
Informational Integration
5
6
Conclusions
A verb with a theme will tend to be interpreted as informationally autonomous if the two are not sisters but can, ceteris paribus, be sisters. (If they cannot be sisters anyway, it doesn’t matter that they are not.) The tendency is particularly strong if, conversely, the verb cannot be autonomous if the two are sisters.
References ´ Bende-Farkas, Agnes (1999) “Incorporation as Unification”, in Proceedings of the 12th Amsterdam Colloquium. ´ Bende-Farkas, Agnes and Hans Kamp (2001) Indefinites and Binding: From Specificity to Incorporation. ESSLLI, Helsinki. (http://www.helsinki.fi/esslli/courses/readers/K29.pdf) Farkas, Donka and Henri¨ ette de Swart (2003) The Semantics of Incorporation, Stanford: CSLI Publications (www.let.uu.nl/˜Henriette.deSwart/personal/Farkas+DeSwart.htm). Jacobs, Joachim (1993) “Integration”, in Marga Reis (ed.), Wortstellung und Informationsstruktur, T¨ ubingen: Niemeyer, 64–116. Jacobs, Joachim (1999) “Informational Autonomy”, in Peter Bosch and Rob van der Sandt (eds.), Focus, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 56–81. J¨ ager, Gerhard (2001) “Topic-Comment Structure and the Contrast between Stage Level and Individual Level Predicates”, in Journal of Semantics 18, 83–126. Ladusaw, William (1994) “Thetic and Categorical, Stage and Individual, Weak and Strong”, in Mandy Harvey and Lynn Santelmann (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 4, Ithaca: Cornell University, 220–229. McNally, Louise (1998) “Stativity and Theticity”, in Susan Rothstein (ed.), Events and Grammar, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 293–307. van Geenhoven, Veerle (1996) Semantic Incorporation and Indefinite Descriptions, Ph.D. thesis, University of T¨ ubingen.
