Coordination (linguistics)
In linguistics, a coordination is a complex syntactic structure that links together two or more elements, known as conjuncts or conjoins. Coordinators are typically: "and" and "or". The word "but" is also often considered a coordinator although it may have slightly different properties from others.
Coordination has a number of interesting linguistic properties.
- Any syntactic category can be coordinated.
- It is subject to the Rule of Coordination of Likes
- It is subject to the Coordinate Structure Constraint.
- but is subject to an exception in the form of Across-the-Board extraction.
Coordinating conjunctions are often, though not always, used to link the conjuncts in a coordination. Depending on the number of conjunctions used, coordinations can be classified as "syndetic", "asyndetic", or "polysyndetic". Coordination can be contrasted with subordination, a complex structure in which the component parts do not have parallel functions. This is also known as pseudo-coordination. The interest of pseudo-coordination lies in the ways this construction differs from coordination proper.
Contents |
[edit] Coordination of likes
The following examples show that like constituents can be coordinated but unlike ones generally cannot.[1]
- [Sarah and Xolani] went to town (coordination of NPs)
- [The chicken and the rice] go well together (coordination of DPs)
- [That the president understood the criticism and that he took action] was appreciated (coordination of CPs)
- The president [understood the criticism and took action] (coordination of VPs)
- (*)[Sarah and that the president understood the criticism] were appreciated
There are, however, a number of exceptions to the Rule of coordination of likes for example the following sentence. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]
- Sarah is a CEO and proud of her job.
The conjuncts generally have similar grammatical features (e.g. syntactic category, semantic function), and the coordinated structure as a whole retains most of the same properties as the individual conjuncts, although it may introduce new features (e.g. plurality).
[edit] Island Properties
The Coordinate Structure Constraint Coordination constructions are strong islands for extraction; one cannot extract from any single conjunct.[7]
- (*)Who and Sarah went to town?
- (*)Sarah and who went to town?
- (*)What did the president understand the criticism and take?
The Across-the-Board Constraint There is an exception to the islandhood property however: it is possible to extract from a coordination construction if one extracts the same constituent from both conjuncts simultaneously.[8][9]
- What did Sarah like and Xolani hate?
There are other apparent exceptions the Coordinate Structure Constraint and the Across-the-Board generalization and their integration to existing syntactic theory has been a long-standing disciplinary desideratum.[10] [11] [12] [13] [14][15] [16]
[edit] Pseudo-coordination
In pseudo-coordinative constructions, the coordinator, generally `and', appears to have a subordinating function. It occurs in many languages and is sometimes known as "hendiadys", and often, but not always, is used to convey a pejorative or idiomatic connotation.[17] Among the Germanic languages, Pseudo-coordination occurs in English, Afrikaans, Norwegian, Danish and Swedish.[18][19] Pseudo-coordination appears to be absent in Dutch and German. The pseudo-coordinative construction is limited to a few verbs. In English, these verbs are typically "go", "try" and "sit". In other languages, typical pseudo-coordinative verbs and/or hendiadys predicates are egressive verbs (e.g. "go") and verbs of body posture (e.g. "sit", "stand" and "lie down").
- Why don't you go and jump in the lake
- I will try and jump in the lake
- The pupils sat and read their textbooks
A typical property of pseudo-coordinative constructions is that, unlike ordinary coordination, they appear to violate the Across-the-Board extraction property. In other words, it is possible to extract from one of the conjuncts.[20][21]
- What did she go and jump in t?
- What did she try and jump in
- Which textbooks did the pupils sit and read.
It has been argued that pseudo-coordination is not a unitary phenomenon. Even in a single language such as English, the predicate "try" exhibits different pseudo-coordination properties to other predicates and other predicates such as "go" and "sit" can instantiate a number of different pseudo-coordinative construction types.[22] On the other hand, it has been argued that at least some different types of pseudo-coordination can be analysed using ordinary coordination as opposed to stipulating that pseudo-coordinative `and' is a subordinator; the differences between the various constructions derive from the level of structure that is coordinated e.g. coordination of heads, coordination of VP etc.[23]
[edit] Notes
- ^ Williams, E. (1978). Across the board rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 9,31--43.
- ^ Sag, I., Gazdar, T., Wassow, T. and S. Weisler. (1985). Coordination and how to distinguish categories. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, pp117--171.
- ^ Progovac, L. (1998). Structure for coordination (Part 1). GLOT International 3(7), pp3--6.
- ^ Bayer, S. (1996). The coordination of unlike categories. Language 72,pp579--616
- ^ Dik, S. (1968). Coordination: its implications for a theory of general linguistics. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Company.
- ^ Zoerner, E. (1995). Coordination: the syntax of &P. Ph.D thesis. University of California, Irvine.
- ^ Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- ^ Ross, J. (1967). Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. thesis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- ^ Williams, E. (1978). Across the board rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 9,31--43.
- ^ Progovac, L. (1998). Structure for coordination (Part 1). GLOT International 3(7), pp3--6
- ^ Carden, G. and D. Pesetsky (1977). Double-verb constructions, markedness and a fake coordination. In Papers from the 13th regional meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago, pp82--92. University of Chicago. Reprinted in: Minoru Yasui (Ed.), Kaigai Eigogaku-ronso, (1979) Tokyo: Eichosha Company.
- ^ Culicover, P. and R. Jackendoff (1997). Semantic subordination despite syntactic coordination. Linguistic Inquiry 28(2), pp195--217.
- ^ Zoerner, E. (1995). Coordination: the syntax of &P. Ph.D thesis. University of California, Irvine.
- ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
- ^ Lakoff, G. (1986). Frame semantic control of the coordinate structure constraint. In A. Farley, P. Farley, and K-E. McCullough (Eds). CLS 22, Part 2: Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical theory, Chicago, pp152--167. Chicago Linguistic Society.
- ^ Goldsmith, J. (1985). A principled exception of the coordinate structure constraint. In W. Eilfort, P. Kroeber and K. Peterson (Eds). CLS 21, Part 1: papers from the general session at the twenty-first regional meeting, Chicago, pp133--143. Chicago Linguistic Society.
- ^ Na, Y. and G. Huck (1992). On extracting from asymmetrical structures. In D. Brentari, G. Larson and L. Macleod (Eds), The joy of grammar: a festschrift in honour of James D. Mccawley, pp251--274. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
- ^ Wiklund, A-L. (2005). The syntax of tenselessness: on copying constructions in Swedish. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Umeaa
- ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
- ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
- ^ Lakoff, G. (1986). Frame semantic control of the coordinate structure constraint. In A. Farley, P. Farley, and K-E. McCullough (Eds). CLS 22, Part 2: Papers from the parasession on pragmatics and grammatical theory, Chicago, pp152--167. Chicago Linguistic Society.
- ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
- ^ De Vos, M. (2005). The syntax of pseudo-coordination in English and Afrikaans.
[edit] Other references
- Postal, P. (1998). Three investigations of extraction. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
- Schmerling, S. (1975). Asymmetric coordination and rules of conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (Eds). Speech Acts, Volume 3 of Syntax and semantics, pp211–231. New York: Academic Press.
