Surface generalizations

Abstract

Abstract Since the earliest days of generative grammar, there has existed a strong tendency to consider one construction in relation to a particular rough paraphrase. Initially, this was a result of the emphasis on transformations that derived one pattern from another. While today there exist many non-derivational theories for which this motivation no longer exists, the traditional outlook has not completely lost its grip, as can be seen from continuing focus on partial or incomplete generalizations such as the ‘dative’ construction or the ‘locative’ alternation. This chapter argues that it is profitable to look beyond alternations: to consider each surface pattern on its own terms. It is observed that when considering instances of the same surface pattern involving different words, similarities should be attributed to the surface pattern and differences to the different verbs and arguments involved. A derivational proposal is critiqued in order to demonstrate that what appear to be arguments in favour of derivations are often in fact arguments in favour of attention to surface structure instead.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 22 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.