Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation

Chung Chieh Shan, Christian Barker

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    We present a general theory of scope and binding in which both crossover and superiority violations are ruled out by one key assumption: that natural language expressions are normally evaluated (processed) from left to right. Our theory is an extension of Shan's (2002) account of multiple-wh questions, combining continuations (Barker, 2002) and dynamic type-shifting. Like other continuation-based analyses, but unlike most other treatments of crossover or superiority, our analysis is directly compositional (in the sense of, e.g., Jacobson, 1999). In particular, it does not postulate a level of Logical Form or any other representation distinct from surface syntax. One advantage of using continuations is that they are the standard tool for modeling order-of-evaluation in programming languages. This provides us with a natural and independently motivated characterization of what it means to evaluate expressions from left to right. We give a combinatory categorial grammar that models the syntax and the semantics of quantifier scope and wh-question formation. It allows quantificational binding but not crossover, in-situ wh but not superiority violations. In addition, the analysis automatically accounts for a variety of sentence types involving binding in the presence of pied piping, including reconstruction cases such as Whose criticism of his i mother did each person i resent?

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)91-134
    Number of pages44
    JournalLinguistics and Philosophy
    Volume29
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Feb 2006

    Fingerprint

    syntax
    case reconstruction
    programming language
    evaluation
    grammar
    criticism
    semantics
    human being
    language
    Continuation
    Superiority
    Evaluation
    Wh-questions
    Syntax
    Violations
    Modeling
    Wh-in Situ
    General Theory
    Person
    Type-shifting

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Philosophy
    • Linguistics and Language

    Cite this

    Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation. / Shan, Chung Chieh; Barker, Christian.

    In: Linguistics and Philosophy, Vol. 29, No. 1, 02.2006, p. 91-134.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Shan, Chung Chieh ; Barker, Christian. / Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation. In: Linguistics and Philosophy. 2006 ; Vol. 29, No. 1. pp. 91-134.
    @article{c197a23447cf4e19a460116fd7ff45f5,
    title = "Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation",
    abstract = "We present a general theory of scope and binding in which both crossover and superiority violations are ruled out by one key assumption: that natural language expressions are normally evaluated (processed) from left to right. Our theory is an extension of Shan's (2002) account of multiple-wh questions, combining continuations (Barker, 2002) and dynamic type-shifting. Like other continuation-based analyses, but unlike most other treatments of crossover or superiority, our analysis is directly compositional (in the sense of, e.g., Jacobson, 1999). In particular, it does not postulate a level of Logical Form or any other representation distinct from surface syntax. One advantage of using continuations is that they are the standard tool for modeling order-of-evaluation in programming languages. This provides us with a natural and independently motivated characterization of what it means to evaluate expressions from left to right. We give a combinatory categorial grammar that models the syntax and the semantics of quantifier scope and wh-question formation. It allows quantificational binding but not crossover, in-situ wh but not superiority violations. In addition, the analysis automatically accounts for a variety of sentence types involving binding in the presence of pied piping, including reconstruction cases such as Whose criticism of his i mother did each person i resent?",
    author = "Shan, {Chung Chieh} and Christian Barker",
    year = "2006",
    month = "2",
    doi = "10.1007/s10988-005-6580-7",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "29",
    pages = "91--134",
    journal = "Linguistics and Philosophy",
    issn = "0165-0157",
    publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
    number = "1",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation

    AU - Shan, Chung Chieh

    AU - Barker, Christian

    PY - 2006/2

    Y1 - 2006/2

    N2 - We present a general theory of scope and binding in which both crossover and superiority violations are ruled out by one key assumption: that natural language expressions are normally evaluated (processed) from left to right. Our theory is an extension of Shan's (2002) account of multiple-wh questions, combining continuations (Barker, 2002) and dynamic type-shifting. Like other continuation-based analyses, but unlike most other treatments of crossover or superiority, our analysis is directly compositional (in the sense of, e.g., Jacobson, 1999). In particular, it does not postulate a level of Logical Form or any other representation distinct from surface syntax. One advantage of using continuations is that they are the standard tool for modeling order-of-evaluation in programming languages. This provides us with a natural and independently motivated characterization of what it means to evaluate expressions from left to right. We give a combinatory categorial grammar that models the syntax and the semantics of quantifier scope and wh-question formation. It allows quantificational binding but not crossover, in-situ wh but not superiority violations. In addition, the analysis automatically accounts for a variety of sentence types involving binding in the presence of pied piping, including reconstruction cases such as Whose criticism of his i mother did each person i resent?

    AB - We present a general theory of scope and binding in which both crossover and superiority violations are ruled out by one key assumption: that natural language expressions are normally evaluated (processed) from left to right. Our theory is an extension of Shan's (2002) account of multiple-wh questions, combining continuations (Barker, 2002) and dynamic type-shifting. Like other continuation-based analyses, but unlike most other treatments of crossover or superiority, our analysis is directly compositional (in the sense of, e.g., Jacobson, 1999). In particular, it does not postulate a level of Logical Form or any other representation distinct from surface syntax. One advantage of using continuations is that they are the standard tool for modeling order-of-evaluation in programming languages. This provides us with a natural and independently motivated characterization of what it means to evaluate expressions from left to right. We give a combinatory categorial grammar that models the syntax and the semantics of quantifier scope and wh-question formation. It allows quantificational binding but not crossover, in-situ wh but not superiority violations. In addition, the analysis automatically accounts for a variety of sentence types involving binding in the presence of pied piping, including reconstruction cases such as Whose criticism of his i mother did each person i resent?

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33744760904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33744760904&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1007/s10988-005-6580-7

    DO - 10.1007/s10988-005-6580-7

    M3 - Article

    VL - 29

    SP - 91

    EP - 134

    JO - Linguistics and Philosophy

    JF - Linguistics and Philosophy

    SN - 0165-0157

    IS - 1

    ER -