@phdthesis{Ritz2013, author = {Ritz, Julia}, title = {Discourse-givenness of noun phrases : theoretical and computational models}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-70818}, school = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2013}, abstract = {This thesis gives formal definitions of discourse-givenness, coreference and reference, and reports on experiments with computational models of discourse-givenness of noun phrases for English and German. Definitions are based on Bach's (1987) work on reference, Kibble and van Deemter's (2000) work on coreference, and Kamp and Reyle's Discourse Representation Theory (1993). For the experiments, the following corpora with coreference annotation were used: MUC-7, OntoNotes and ARRAU for Englisch, and TueBa-D/Z for German. As for classification algorithms, they cover J48 decision trees, the rule based learner Ripper, and linear support vector machines. New features are suggested, representing the noun phrase's specificity as well as its context, which lead to a significant improvement of classification quality.}, language = {en} } @article{Rooth2007, author = {Rooth, Mats}, title = {Notions of focus anaphoricity}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-19622}, year = {2007}, abstract = {This article reviews some of the theoretical notions and empirical phenomena which figure in current formal-semantic theories of focus. It also develops the connection between "alternative semantics" and "givenness" accounts of focus interpretation.}, language = {en} } @article{Salzmann2009, author = {Salzmann, Martin}, title = {Variation in resumption requires violable constraints}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {28}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32251}, pages = {99 -- 132}, year = {2009}, abstract = {Variation in dative resumption among and within Alemannic varieties of German strongly favors an Evaluator component that makes use of optimality-theoretic evaluation rather than filters as in the Minimalist Program (MP). At the same time, the variation is restricted to realizational requirements. This supports a model of syntax like the Derivations and Evaluations framework (Broekhuis 2008) that combines a restrictive MP-style Generator with an Evaluator that includes ranked violable (interface) constraints.}, language = {en} } @article{SamekLudovici2006, author = {Samek-Ludovici, Vieri}, title = {Optimality theory and the minimalist program}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {25}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32328}, pages = {77 -- 97}, year = {2006}, abstract = {Content: 1 Introduction 2 Crosslinguistic Variation 3 Constraint Conflict 3.1 Conflict between Prosody and Syntax 3.2 Conflict between Economy Principles 4 OT and Minimalism}, language = {en} } @article{Schaden2009, author = {Schaden, Gerhard}, title = {Say hello to markedness}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {28}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32247}, pages = {73 -- 97}, year = {2009}, abstract = {In this paper, it will be shown that Bi-directional Optimality Theory (BOT) runs into problems of undergeneration when confronted with a certain class of partial-blocking phenomena. The empirical problem used to illustrate this is the cross-linguistic variation of one-step past-referring tenses. It will be argued that the well-known 'present perfect puzzle' is a sub-problem of it. The solution to the cross-linguistic variation of these tenses involves blocking of the marked tense. The relevant notion of 'markedness', while underivable synchronically, is argued to be linked to diachronic learning processes similar to those investigated by Benz (2006).}, language = {en} } @article{SchlesewskyFanselowFrisch2003, author = {Schlesewsky, Matthias and Fanselow, Gisbert and Frisch, Stefan}, title = {Case as a trigger for reanalysis}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {21}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32431}, pages = {31 -- 60}, year = {2003}, abstract = {In the recent literature there is a hypothesis that the human parser uses number and case information in different ways to resolve an initially incorrect case assignment. This paper investigates what role morphological case information plays during the parser's detection of an ungrammaticality or its recognition that a reanalysis is necessary. First, we compare double nominative with double accusative ungrammaticalities in a word by word, speeded grammaticality task and in this way show that only double nominatives lead to a so-called "illusion of grammaticality" (a low rate of ungrammaticality detection). This illusion was found to disappear when the second argument was realized by a pronoun rather than by a full definite determiner phrase, i.e. when the saliency of the second argument was increased. Thus, the accuracy in recognizing an ungrammaticality induced by the case feature of the second argument is dependent on the type of this argument. Furthermore, we found that the accuracy in detecting such case ungrammaticalities is distance sensitive insofar as a shorter distance leads to a higher accuracy. The results are taken as support for an "expectationdriven" parse strategy in which the way the parser uses the information of a current input item depends on the expectation resulting from the parse carried out so far. By contrast, "input-driven" parse strategies, such as the diagnosis model (Fodor \& Inoue, 1999) are unable to explain the data presented here.}, language = {en} } @article{SchlesewskyFrisch2003, author = {Schlesewsky, Matthias and Frisch, Stefan}, title = {Nominative case as a multidimensional default}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {21}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32447}, pages = {61 -- 72}, year = {2003}, abstract = {The present paper addresses a current view in the psycholinguistic literature that case exhibits processing properties distinct from those of other morphological features such as number (cf. Fodor \& Inoue, 2000; Meng \& Bader, 2000a/b). In a speeded-acceptability judgement experiment, we show that the low performance previously found for case in contrast to number violations is limited to nominative case, whereas violations involving accusative and dative are judged more accurately. The data thus do not support the proposal that case per se is associated with special properties (in contrast to other features such as number) in reanalysis processes. Rather, there are significant judgement differences between the object cases accusative and dative on the one hand and the subject nominative case on the other. This may be explained by the fact that nominative has a specific status in German (and many other languages) as a default case.}, language = {en} } @article{Schwarz2007, author = {Schwarz, Anne}, title = {The particles l{\´e} and l{\´a} in the grammar of Konkomba}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-19449}, year = {2007}, abstract = {The paper investigates focus marking devices in the scarcely documented North-Ghanaian Gur language Konkomba. The two particles l{\´e} and l{\´a} occur under specific focus conditions and are therefore regarded as focus markers in the sparse literature. Comparing the distribution and obligatoriness of both alleged focus markers however, I show that one of the particles, l{\´e}, is better analyzed as a connective particle, i.e. as a syntactic rather than as a genuine pragmatic marker, and that comparable syntactic focus marking strategies for sentence-initial constituents are also known from related languages.}, language = {en} } @incollection{Selkirk2007, author = {Selkirk, Elisabeth}, title = {Contrastive focus, givenness and the unmarked status of "Discourse-New"}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-19670}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam}, year = {2007}, abstract = {New evidence is provided for a grammatical principle that singles out contrastive focus (Rooth 1996; Truckenbrodt 1995) and distinguishes it from discourse-new "informational" focus. Since the prosody of discourse-given constituents may also be distinguished from discourse-new, a three-way distinction in representation is motivated. It is assumed that an F-feature marks just contrastive focus (Jackendoff 1972, Rooth 1992), and that a G-feature marks discoursegiven constituents (F{\´e}ry and Samek-Lodovici 2006), while discoursenew is unmarked. A crucial argument for G-marking comes from second occurrence focus (SOF) prosody, which arguably derives from a syntactic representation where SOF is both F-marked and G-marked. This analysis relies on a new G-Marking Condition specifying that a contrastive focus may be G-marked only if the focus semantic value of its scope is discourse-given, i.e. only if the contrast itself is given.}, language = {en} } @article{SennemavandeVijverCarrolletal.2005, author = {Sennema, Anke and van de Vijver, Ruben and Carroll, Susanne E. and Zimmer-Stahl, Anne}, title = {Focus accent, word length and position as cues to L1 and L2 word recognition}, series = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, journal = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, number = {3}, issn = {1866-4725}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-8769}, pages = {183 -- 198}, year = {2005}, abstract = {The present study examines native and nonnative perceptual processing of semantic information conveyed by prosodic prominence. Five groups of German learners of English each listened to one of 5 experimental conditions. Three conditions differed in place of focus accent in the sentence and two conditions were with spliced stimuli. The experiment condition was presented first in the learners' L1 (German) and then in a similar set in the L2 (English). The effect of the accent condition and of the length and position of the target in the sentence was evaluated in a probe recognition task. In both the L1 and L2 tasks there was no significant effect in any of the five focus conditions. Target position and target word length had an effect in the L1 task. Word length did not affect accuracy rates in the L2 task. For probe recognition in the L2, word length and the position of the target interacted with the focus condition.}, language = {en} } @article{Skopeteas2019, author = {Skopeteas, Stavros}, title = {Splits and Birds}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43257}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432578}, pages = {335 -- 341}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{Soschen2006, author = {Soschen, Alona}, title = {Natural law}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {25}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32316}, pages = {43 -- 76}, year = {2006}, abstract = {This work concentrates on the requirements of the computational system of HL, by developing the idea that Natural Law applies to universal syntactic principles. The systems of efficient growth are for the continuation of motion and maximal distance between the elements. The condition of maximization accounts for the properties of syntactic trees - binary branching, labeling, and the EPP. NL justifies the basic principle of organization in Merge: it provides a functional explanation of phase formation and thematic domains. In Optimality Theory, it accounts for the selection of a particular word order in languages. A comprehensive and definitive understanding of the principles underlying MP will eventually lead to a more advanced design of OT.}, language = {en} } @article{Stiebels2019, author = {Stiebels, Barbara}, title = {Bienenfresserortungsversuch}, series = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, journal = {Of trees and birds. A Festschrift for Gisbert Fanselow}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43192}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-431921}, pages = {15 -- 26}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{TeichFankhauser2005, author = {Teich, Elke and Fankhauser, Peter}, title = {Exploring lexical patterns in text}, series = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, journal = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, number = {2}, issn = {1866-4725}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-8685}, pages = {129 -- 145}, year = {2005}, abstract = {We present a system for the linguistic exploration and analysis of lexical cohesion in English texts. Using an electronic thesaurus-like resource, Princeton WordNet, and the Brown Corpus of English, we have implemented a process of annotating text with lexical chains and a graphical user interface for inspection of the annotated text. We describe the system and report on some sample linguistic analyses carried out using the combined thesaurus-corpus resource.}, language = {en} } @article{Titov2019, author = {Titov, Elena}, title = {Accusative Unaccusatives}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, isbn = {978-3-86956-457-9}, doi = {10.25932/publishup-43251}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-432515}, pages = {243 -- 256}, year = {2019}, language = {en} } @article{Tomioka2007, author = {Tomioka, Satoshi}, title = {Information Structure as information-based partition}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-19657}, year = {2007}, abstract = {While the Information Structure (IS) is most naturally interpreted as 'structure of information', some may argue that it is structure of something else, and others may object to the use of the word 'structure'. This paper focuses on the question of whether the informational component can have structural properties such that it can be called 'structure'. The preliminary conclusion is that, although there are some vague indications of structurehood in it, it is perhaps better understood to be a representation that encodes a finite set of information-based partitions, rather than structure.}, language = {en} } @article{Tomioka2007, author = {Tomioka, Satoshi}, title = {Intervention effects in focus}, series = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, volume = {9}, journal = {Interdisciplinary studies on information structure : ISIS ; working papers of the SFB 632}, editor = {Ishihara, Shinichiro and Petrova, Svetlana and Schwarz, Anne}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1866-4725}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24502}, pages = {97 -- 118}, year = {2007}, abstract = {The most recent trend in the studies of LF intervention effects makes crucial reference to focusing effects on the interveners, and this paper critically examines the representative analyses of the focus-based approach. While each analysis has its own merits and shortcomings, I argue that a pragmatic analysis that does not make appeal to syntactic configurations is better equipped to deal with many of the complex and delicate facts surrounding intervention effects.}, language = {en} } @article{ViknerEngels2006, author = {Vikner, Sten and Engels, Eva}, title = {An optimality-theoretic analysis of scandinavian object shift and remnant VP-topicalisation}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {25}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32359}, pages = {195 -- 231}, year = {2006}, abstract = {Holmberg (1997, 1999) assumes that Holmberg's generalisation (HG) is derivational, prohibiting Object Shift (OS) across an intervening non-adverbial element at any point in the derivation. Counterexamples to this hypothesis are given in Fox \& Pesetsky (2005) which show that remnant VP-topicalisations are possible in Scandinavian as long as the VP-internal order relations are maintained. Extending the empirical basis concerning remnant VP-topicalisations, we argue that HG and the restrictions on object stranding result from the same, more general condition on order preservation. Considering this condition to be violable and to interact with various constraints on movement in an Optimality-theoretic fashion, we suggest an account for various asymmetries in the interaction between remnant VP-topicalisations and both OS and other movement operations (especially subject raising) as to their order preserving characteristics and stranding abilities.}, language = {en} } @article{Vogel2006, author = {Vogel, Ralf}, title = {The simple generator}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, number = {25}, issn = {1616-7392}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32338}, pages = {99 -- 136}, year = {2006}, abstract = {I argue that the shift of explanatory burden from the generator to the evaluator in OT syntax - together with the difficulties that arise when we try to formulate a working theory of the interfaces of syntax - leads to a number of assumptions about syntactic structures in OT which are quite different from those typical of minimalist syntax: formal features, as driving forces behind syntactic movement, are useless, and derivational and representational economy are problematic for both empirical and conceptual reasons. The notion of markedness, central in Optimality Theory, is not fully compatible with the idea of synactic economy. Even more so, seemingly obvious cases of blocking by structural economy do not seem to result from grammar proper, but reflect (economical) aspects of language use.}, language = {en} } @article{Vogel2004, author = {Vogel, Ralf}, title = {Dialectal variation in German 3-verb clusters}, series = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, volume = {22}, journal = {Linguistics in Potsdam}, publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam}, address = {Potsdam}, issn = {1864-1857}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-32516}, pages = {83 -- 118}, year = {2004}, abstract = {Content: 1 The Typology 1.1 Object Placement 2 Treatment of StG in terms of LF Movement - with and without Head Movement 3 An OT-solution in terms of linearisation ('LF-to-PF-Mapping') 3.1 The trigger for additional orders: Focus 3.2 Competitions 3.3 Summary 4 RP 4.1 LF Movement - with and without Head Movement 4.2 The OT-account for RP 4.3 Competitions 5 Summary}, language = {en} }