GAP

1. (Pragmatics) Conversational silence at the end of a turn in a situation in which:
   • No next speaker has been selected by the previous one.
   • No participant has selected himself or herself as the next speaker.
   • And the silence is too short to constitute a lapse.
    | SIL Glossary of Linguistic Terms, 2003
2. (Grammar) Words that are deemed "untranslatable" are known as lexical gaps. In fact, many of these exist, that books like Lost in Translation by Ella Frances Sanders are on sale, conveying the uniqueness of certain words from various languages that do not quite translate to English.
    Gaps are not just restricted to the realm of the untranslatability of certain words. In linguistics, gaps are termed accidental gaps where certain words do not exist because of the boundaries in the sounds, word formation, or other such rules in the language.
    Perhaps the most noticeable gaps (in English, that is) you may find are called semantic gaps, where some distinction in some meanings that can be found in other languages are not seen in another language's lexicon. To illustrate this, let's take English family member terms for example, where gender distinction is seen. A male parent is called a father, a female parent is called a mother, and parent functions as a neutral term. However, what is a male or a female cousin called? What is the neutral term of niece and nephew, or uncle and aunt? English simply lacks the terms to distinguish them, or has neutral words covering the two distinctions made. This is what we could call a semantic gap.
    The next bit I would want to cover is phonological gaps. We have various rules regarding the sounds we can make, but yet, even if all of these rules are "obeyed", some words would not be considered words. For example, the consonant cluster /spr/ is quite common, with words such as spring, spread, and sprocket, and syllables can end in sounds like /ɪk/, as in flick, prick, and turmeric. However, there is no such English word with the pronunciation /sprɪk/. This can be treated as an example of a so-called phonological gap.
    Lastly, think of an English word that means 'someone who sells things'. Does the word seller come to mind? For some, the word vendor might also pop up. But the point is, the ending -er adds the marker that means 'someone who ...' to the verb it follows. However, 'someone who lives' is not really referred to as a liver, and the word liver is more commonly associated with the organ. Similarly, 'someone who steals' is not usually called a stealer, but a thief. Because of such morphological rules governing word formation, such words like stealer and liver ('someone who lives') are known as morphological gaps. | Zui, 2021

GAPPED DEGREE PHRASE

1. (Syntax) An A' movement construction discussed in Chomsky (1977).
   1. Ian is too shy for Anneke to talk to ___.
    | ?
2. (Syntax) This paper investigates gaps in degree phrases with too.
   1. John is too rich [for the monastery to hire __ ].
    We present two curious restrictions on such gapped degree phrases.
   1. The gaps must ordinarily be anteceded by the subject of the associated gradable adjective.
   2. When embedded under intensional verbs, gapped degree phrases are ordinarily restricted to surface scope, unlike their counterparts without gaps.
    Just as puzzlingly, we show that these restrictions are lifted when there is overt wh-movement in the main clause, revealing a striking similarity between the distribution of gapped degree phrases and so-called parasitic gap constructions. | Jon Nissenbaum and Bernhard Schwarz, 2011

GAPPING
(Syntax) Gapping is a kind of ellipsis construction in which repeated verbs in coordinate structures are omitted. The term was introduced by Ross (1967) as a kind of conjunction reduction rule.
 See the following example (Ross 1967) from English where the application of gapping on (1) results in (2).

1. The boy works in a skyscraper and the girl works in a quonset hut.
2. The boy works in a skyscraper and the girl in a quonset hut.

GARDEN-PATH SENTENCE

1. (Syntax) Language is rife with temporary syntactic ambiguities. Most of these ambiguities go unnoticed during reading. In some cases, however, resolving the ambiguity can lead to substantial processing difficulty, as in (1).
   1. Even though the girl phoned the instructor was very upset with her for missing a lesson.
    When the noun phrase the instructor is first read, it can be interpreted either as the object of phoned or as the subject of an upcoming clause. The disambiguating words was very upset, which rule out the direct object analysis, are typically read more slowly than they would be in an unambiguous sentence.
    Temporary ambiguities as in (1) are said to lead the reader "down the garden path". | Marten van Schijndel and Tal Linzen, 2018
2. (Syntax) It turns out that ambiguities often occur in incremental evaluation. A particular class of sentences is Garden Path Sentences. In these sentences, the most likely parse in incremental evaluation turns out to be incorrect. Let us look at a couple of examples:
   1. The criminal confessed his sins which upset kids harmed too many people.
   2. As the woman edited the magazine about fishing amused all the reporters.
    Often, sentences may be impossible to parse. | Chirag Gupta, 2014
3. (Syntax) A garden path sentence leads a parser initially to an incorrect interpretation. This is often due to the components having multiple meanings, with the grammatical parse being significantly less frequent than the misinterpretation.
   1. The horse ran past the barn fell.
      1. The horse ran past the barn *[fell].
      2. The horse that was being run past the barn later fell down.
   2. The old man the boat.
      1. The man who is old *[the boat].
      2. The elderly people control the boat.
    | Glottopedia, 2014

GEMINATE
(Phonology) A geminate is a consonant that has contrastively longer duration than its singleton counterpart. This phenomenon is akin to long vowels, represented as [V:]. However, geminates are frequently represented as a series of two identical consonants, rather than as a single, long consonant.
 Gemination is a contrastive process in Arabic, Estonian, Finnish, Classical Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Japanese, Latin, Luganda, Norwegian, Russian and Swedish.
 Gemination is not a phonological process typically present in English, but can be found in compound nouns.

1. English:
   [tt] in cattail
   (Compare the consonant length in catfish.)

2. Japanese:
   [shusshin] ('origin, source') versus
   [shushin] ('master, husband')

GEN

1. (Oprimality Theory) Grammar is deceptively simple under OT. At the universal level, there is a set of constraints on phonological representations (CON). There is also a means for generating relationships between an actual input and all potential outputs (GEN). Finally, there is a mechanism for simultaneously evaluating the potential outputs against the set of ranked constraints in order to select the optimal output for the input in question (EVAL).

   1. The result of feeding /pču/ into GEN
       p₁č₂u₃ → { p₁č₂u₃ , k₁r₂ɔ₃ , č₂u₃p₁ , č₂u₃ , p₁i č₂u₃ , č₇u₉ }

    In OT analysis of the surface forms of /pču/, the first step is the input, /pču/, 'ten'. GEN matches this input with output candidates by showing correspondences (via subscripts) between the segments of/pču/ and the candidates, seen in (1). The mappings in (1) are representative of the kinds of things that GEN can do. GEN can show correspondences with an output candidate that is completely faithful, [p₁č₂u₃], but it can also show correspondences with output candidates that are not completely faithful. Differences can occur in a variety of ways: by the features of the corresponding elements, [k₁r₂ɔ₃]; by the order of the corresponding elements, [č₂u₃p₁]; and by a mismatch in the number of elements, [č₂u₃] and [p₁i č₂u₃]. Additionally, it is formally possible to have output candidates that bear no correspondence relation to the input at all, regardless of the segmental makeup of the string, [č₇u₉]. In principle, GEN provides correspondences to an infinite number of candidates. In practice, linguists try to select the candidates that are closest to the winner and to show how these are eliminated by EVAL.  | D.B. Archangeli, 1999
2. (Optimality Theory) A basic component of OT. GEN takes an input, and generates the list of possible outputs, or candidates. Given any input, GEN generates an infinite number of candidates, or possible realizations of that input. | Wikipedia, 2018

GENERAL PROHIBITIVE

1. (Syntax) A type of form used to express banned actions. E.g., No Smoking! (gerund form) and No Pets! (bare noun form). "General prohibitives" contain the predicate is allowed, an imperative modal on the C head, and a mandatory deletion of part (or all) of the predicate. | Michael Donovan, 2017
2. (Grammar) I co-opt the term prohibitive from the literature on imperatives (Zanuttini 1997, Aikhenvald 1999, and Xrakovski 2001, a.o.) and apply it additionally to constructions like those seen below in (1). General prohibitives can commonly be seen on public signs or notices.
   1. a. No jumping on the sofa!
      b. No crying in baseball!
      c. No spoilers in this thread!
      d. Visitors before 10 P.M. only!
    In this paper, "General Prohibitive" (GP) refers to an expression like those in (1) that contains no followed by a noun, or a noun followed by only. This noun can be a gerund, as in (1a) and (1b), but it does not have to be, as (1c) and (1d) show. A crucial property of GPs is that they are typically interpreted as being general, or universal. The default interpretation of general prohibition is that the content of the prohibition is a violation of a rule or ordinance—and anyone who violates it is in violation of the rule. Thus, an utterance like No jumping on the sofa! receives the default interpretation that no one is allowed to jump on the sofa, and anyone who jumps on the sofa is violating a rule. It is not necessary for the rule to be a literal law, merely something in a given context that is not allowed. This is in contrast to the imperative Don't jump on the sofa!, which receives the default interpretation of applying only to the addressee(s). | Michael Donovan, 2020

GENERIC NOUN PHRASE

1. (Semantics) A noun phrase that does not refer to a specific (set of) individual(s), but rather to a kind or class of individuals. Thus, the NP The lion in (1) is understood as a reference to the class 'lion' instead of a specific individual. "Generic NPs" are not restricted to occur with kind-related predicates as in (1). As seen in (2), they may equally well be combined with predicates that denote specific actions. In contrast to (1), the property defined by the verb phrase in (2) may hold of individual lions.
   1. The lion was the most widespread mammal.
   2. Lions eat up to 30 kg in one sitting.
    | Nils Reiter and Anette Frank, 2010
2. (Grammar) In (1), the NPs the Indian elephant, kangaroos, and a cat have generic readings.
   1. a. The Indian elephant is gray.
      b. Kangaroos live in Australia.
      c. A cat sleeps during the day.
    In (2) the same NPs have an ordinary definite reading (2a) and indefinite readings (2b, 2c).
   2. a. The Indian elephant escaped from the zoo.
      b. Kangaroos left tracks in my garden.
      c. A cat walked in.
    | Karina Jo Wilkinson, 1991

GENERIC NULL OBJECT
(Grammar) Two recent studies—Larjavaara (2000) on French and García Velasco and Portero Muñoz (2002) on English—address the issue of null objects comprehensively, while taking account of previous work on this topic. The findings of these two studies show clear similarities between the two languages. Both studies distinguish two types of objects: García Velasco and Portero Muñoz call the two types indefinite and definite null objects, while Larjavaara refers to "generic" and latent null objects. Examples of the two types are illustrated in (1) and (2):

1. Indefinite/generic
   a. Do you write __? (GV and PM)
   b. Wild Guns est un jeu qui défoule __. (L)
    'Wild Guns is a game that destresses __.'
2. Definite/latent
   a. "Do you like __?" "I love __!" (GV and PM)
   b. «Tu as lu les pages?» Il avait lu __. (L)
    '"Did you read the pages?" He had read __.'

GENERIC PERSON
(Grammar) Jespersen (1933) speaks of a "generic person" which vaguely comprises all persons. It is represented on the surface by one, he, his, himself, you, we, and they.

1. One always finds oneself embarrassed when he is in a situation which highligllts his stupidity.
2. You can never tell about such things.
3. We live to learn.

GENERIC PRESENT TENSE
(Grammar) Jespersen (1931) draws a line between "generic" and non-generic present tense. Nongeneric present is exemplified by (1) and generic present by (2).

1. He is ill.
2. None but the brave deserves the fair.

GENERIC SENTENCE

1. (Grammar; Semantics) By "generic sentence", we mean any sentence that yields a generic (characteristic, habitual) interpretation, irrespective of whether it contains a so-called generic NP or are generic for some other reason (which some would claim is the use of a generic tense – see, for example, Dahl 1975). Thus, the following are typical instances of the kind of constructions that we will be concerned with:
   1. John's dog attacks cats.
   2. Bill smokes heavily.
   3. Germans like beer.
   4. A/The politician has a busy life.
   5. Ted votes for liberals.
    Sentences like these allow several interpretations, the reason being (as we will argue) that they fail to give precise information on a number of points. For example, (5) is unspecified for at least the following sets of readings:
   1. The sentence can be interpreted as meaning either that Ted votes only for liberals or that there are liberals among the candidates he votes for.
   2. Sentence (5) does not specify whether Ted votes on every occasion when he is offered the opportunity of doing so. Ted may be a conscientious citizen who makes use of his right to vote whenever there is an election, or he may vote at some elections or skip others.
   3. The sentence does not specify either whether Ted votes for liberals whenever he votes, or at only some of the elections at which he votes.
   4. (5) equally leaves open whether, at any particular election Ted votes for all the liberal candidates or just for some.
   5. If Ted votes for some liberal candidates (at all or some of the elections), he may always vote for the same liberal candidates, or each time for others, or partly for the same and partly for others.
   6. The speaker of (5) may be just making a statement of fact, or he may want to express the opinion that Ted votes for liberals as a matter of principle. In other words, Ted's voting behavior may be accidental or principled.
    No doubt other distinctions could be made. | Renaat Declerck, 1986
2. (Grammar) A characterizing sentence that quantifies over situations or events, expressing rule-like knowledge about habitual actions or situations (1). This is in contrast with sentences that refer to specific events and individuals, as in (2).
   1. After 1971 [Paul Erdős] also took amphetamines.
   2. Paul Erdős was born [...] on March 26, 1913.
    | Nils Reiter and Anette Frank, 2010
3. (Grammar) In the presentation of the data difference will be made between two subkinds of "generic sentences":
    I. Personal Generics: The (standard) Dutch determiner system is in many respects similar to that in German. Dutch definite singular, indefinite singular, bare plural and definite plural count noun phrases can be used in personal generic contexts (cf. 1 and 2), just like German (cf. 3) (Torsten Leuschner p.c.):
   1. a.
       

      De
      The

      Zwitser
      Swiss

      eet
      eats

      graag
      ADV

      chocolade.
      chocolate.

        'The Swiss likes to eat chocolate.'
      b.
       

      Een
      A

      Zwitser
      Swiss

      eet
      eats

      graag
      ADV

      chocolade.
      chocolate.
      c.
       

      Zwitsers
      Swiss

      eten
      eat

      graag
      ADV

      chocolade.
      chocolate.
      d.
       

      De
      The

      Zwitsers
      Swiss

      eten
      eat

      graag
      ADV

      chocolade.
      chocolate.
   2. a.
       

      De
      The

      spreeuw
      starling

      voedt
      feeds

      zich
      REFL

      met
      on

      insecten
      insects

      en
      and

      vruchten.
      fruit.
      b.
       

      Een
      A

      spreeuw
      starling

      voedt
      feeds

      zich
      REFL

      met
      on

      insecten
      insects

      en
      and

      vruchten.
      fruit.
      c.
       

      Spreeuwen
      Starlings

      voeden
      feed

      zich
      REFL

      met
      on

      insecten
      insects

      en
      and

      vruchten.
      fruit.
      d.
       

      De
      The

      spreeuwen
      starlings

      voeden
      feeds

      zich
      REFL

      met
      on

      insecten
      insects

      en
      and

      vruchten.
      fruit.
   3. a. Der Star ernährt sich von Insekten und Früchten.
      b. Ein Star ernährt sich von Insekten und Früchten
      c. Stare ernähren sich von Insekten und Früchten.
      d. Die Stare ernähren sich von Insekten und Früchten.
   
    II. Simple Generics: Reference to kinds is a phenomenon that is encoded in the nominal system. We can verify which noun phrases can be interpreted in this way by attributing so-called kind predicates to them. Kind predicates can be defined as predicates which necessarily refer to properties of kinds. Dutch examples are given in (4) and (5). Cohen (1999) refers to such sentences as "simple generics".
   4. a.
       

      De
      The

      tijger
      tiger

      wordt
      is

      met
      with

      uitsterven
      extinction

      bedreigd.
      threatened.
      b.
       

      # Een
       A

      tijger
      tiger

      wordt
      is

      met
      with

      uitsterven
      extinction

      bedreigd.
      threatened.
      c.
       

      Tijgers
      Tigers

      worden
      are

      met
      with

      uitsterven
      extinction

      bedreigd.
      threatened.
      d.
       

      De
      The

      tijgers
      tigers

      worden
      are

      met
      with

      uitsterven
      extinction

      bedreigd.
      threatened.

        'Tigers are threatened with extinction.'
   5. a.
       

      De
      The

      Neanderthaler
      Neanderthal

      is
      is

      uitgestorven.
      extinct.
      b.
       

      # Een
       A

      Neanderthaler
      Neanderthal

      is
      is

      uitgestorven.
      extinct.
      c.
       

      Neanderthalers
      Neanderthals

      zijn
      are

      uitgestorven.
      extinct.
      d.
       

      De
      The

      Neanderthalers
      Neanderthals

      zijn
      are

      uitgestorven.
      extinct.

        'Neanderthals are extinct.'
    | Albert Oosterhof, 2005

GET-PASSIVE

1. (Grammar) The verb get is sometimes used as an auxiliary in place of be in passive sentences. Compare (1) and (2):
   1. My bicycle got stolen.
      Verb string: PAST + get + EN + steal
   2. My bicycle was stolen.
      Verb string: PAST + be + EN + steal
    The get-passive is normally fairly informal and more likely to occur in casual conversation and informal sorts of writing than in formal writing. It is often used in agentless passives. | ?
2. (Diachronic) Passive get (as in He got arrested) is shown to have developed from inchoative get (He got sick), and not from causative get (He got himself arrested). Passive get arose in cases where inchoative get took an adjectival passive participle as complement and where viewpoint aspect was perfective. Perfective aspect, which yields a bounded-event reading, encouraged the reanalysis of the adjectival passive participle as a verbal passive participle. (Gronemeyer 1999) | Nicholas Fleisher, 2005

Page Halved By Split February 14, 2024

 

B a c k   T o   I n d e x