Under a stipulative/persuasive redefinition that has been offered in recent syntax handbook work (among other places) as a purported sharpening of the distinction between dependency vs. constituency-based descriptions of syntactic constructions impeccable dependency descriptions can be fallaciously categorized as constituency-based. The present chapter demonstrates that the alleged key property, which the persuasive redefinition attributes to the dependency vs. constituency distinction, is ill-founded on conceptual and elementary graph-theoretical grounds and is illegitimately averse to, in particular, dependency-based syntactic descriptions of polycategoriality, which in terms of Anderson’s notionally-grounded dependency grammar involve dependency between linearly coincident syntactic categories. The chapter concludes with a ‘dissection’ of Tesniere’s classical Éléments de syntaxe structurale and a refutation of its interpretation (based on the stipulative/persuasive redefinition of dependency) as a hybrid dependency~constituency grammar.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 38 citations exist upstream.