16

The distinction is between arguments (sometimes also called complements) and adjuncts. In general, arguments are expressions that complete a predicate, and that are required by the predicate. Adjuncts, on the other hand, are not required by the predicate, but they do add (usually temporal or locative) information. Here are some examples: (1) Paul lives in ...


14

Seeing this question reminded me of a section in Peter Matthews book 'Syntax' (1981) (it's meant to be a textbook, but it's more like a monograph really). In Chapter 4, p84-93, there's an explicit comparison and evaluation of dependency grammars vs. constituency grammars. Matthews shows that for any d-grammar, there is a ps-grammar which will generate the ...


13

Yes, there are concrete differences between dependency-based and constituency-based tree representations (D-trees vs. PS-trees). D-trees have the great advantage that they are minimal compared to PS-trees. Thus one can produce a D-tree for a given sentence with much less effort than one needs to produce the corresponding PS-tree for the same sentence. The ...


11

Parsing speed obviously depends on a lot of factors, but in this case I would say that algorithmic complexity is the most important. The transition-based dependency parsers (all except MSTParser and RelEx) use greedy decoding and achieve linear complexity (or quadratic in the case of the Covington algorithm). This should be compared to the constituency-based ...


8

Michael Collins gives a nice explanation in his MOOC on NLP, summarized in this slide: In short: with the usual CKY algorithm in PCFG parsing, which is based on dynamic programming and yields a constituency-based tree, you have a time complexity of O(n^3 * G^3) as the dynamic programming algorithm is also looking for which non-terminal to choose (hence G^3)...


8

Traditionally, c-command does not reach out of a prepositional phrase. Here are two definitions of c-command taken from the literature: C-command: A node A c-commands a node B if, and only if A's sister either is B or contains B (Adger 2003: 117) C-command: Node X c-commands node Y if a sister of X dominates Y. (Sportiche et al. 2014: 161) Both of these ...


7

I asked Michael Covington, whose name is on one of the faster parsers, and he replies: I don't know the inner workings of any of these parsers (not even the one with my name on it, which was implemented by Joakim Nivre). Choice of programming language may have a lot to do with it. Another factor is that with dependency parsing, the search space can be ...


7

Nominals (nouns and pronouns), adjectives, prepositions, subordinators (subordinate conjunctions), and some adverbs can be predicative expressions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicative_expression. The notion that a predicative expression must be an adjective or noun is too narrow. While it is true that adjectives and nominals are widely acknowledged as ...


6

All headed constituency-based structures (i.e. endocentric structures) can be easily translated to the corresponding dependency-based structures. One need merely collapse all the projections (minimal, intermediate, and maximal) of a word down to one node. A non-headed constituency-based structure (i.e. it has exocentric structures), however, cannot be ...


6

Totally depends on your syntax theory. Some prefer to do it with a NegP, as suggested bei @eijen: Others assume the negation to be in I: And then again you could see negation as an adverb modifying the VP, as suggested by @BillJ: There really isn't a uniform answer, because that depends so much on your syntax theory (already whether you assume that ...


6

This is almost certainly done with LaTeX, or one of its friends, and the tikz-qtree package. It is an improvement of the qtree package with nicer node placement. If you are not familiar with LaTeX, and want to learn more, this Wikibook might help (link is to the page about linguistics, but the book is in general about LaTeX). Both tikz-qtree and qtree have a ...


6

"Tree" has been a thing in mathematics for some time. "Phrase structure" is a particular mathematical theory of syntax introduced by Chomsky. As far as I know the first phrase structure tree is on p. VI-205 (268) of "The logical structure of linguistic theory" (1955: original version), where he explains the "Q-derivation" (VI-203a) with a diagram, ...


5

There are several factors at play: The implementation language: C/C++ is faster than Java is faster than Python The algorithm: Most of the constituent parsers, as well as MSTParser, use a dynamic programming approach with O(N^3) time consumption. The ones with "Nivre" in the name use a stepwise deterministic approach with O(N) time consumption. The "...


5

Earley parser is one example of chart parser, also called dynamic programming parser. There are many other kinds such as the CYK parser, the GLR and GLL parser, and more. The whole point of chart parsing is to build a unique chart that will mimic all possible parsing computations, since there may be exponentially many (or even infinitely many in ...


5

This answer is based on chapter 2 (section 8: "Infinitival to) of Minimalist Syntax: Exploring the structure of English by Andrew Radford (2004), and "Auxiliaries: To's company" (2012) by Robert Levine in Journal of Linguistics. Infinitival to is an auxiliary. It is the same category as the other auxiliaries, but it is considered "defective" in a single ...


5

Although what is "correct" always depends on theory, there are various things that are definitely not quite right with your trees. Tree #1 the founder of the church of England The whole thing taken together is an NP (it starts with a definite article and can serve as the subject of a sentence, so it is something nominal, not prepositional), so the root ...


5

I'm not convinced the notion "clitic" is really needful to explain what is going on. Some syntactic rules depend on what the words are, and you can't always trust traditional English orthography to tell you the truth about where the words are. Why should should you? Probably printers made up those rules. The rule of subject auxiliary inversion moves a ...


5

Good question! It depends on the details of your sentence. For sentences like "it is raining" or "there is a rhinoceros", the dummy subjects "it" and "there" act for all (syntactic) intents and purposes like noun phrases. Basically, English syntax doesn't allow a finite verb without a subject, so it adds one at the syntactic level that doesn't exist at the ...


4

I'll attempt to go through the various analytical possibilities for your example sentence within the GB framework: (i) John opened the door and left Hypothesis 1: (i) involves sentential co-ordination This hypothesis entails that (i) involves co-ordination at the IP-level. This leaves open a couple of different possibilities for analysing the subject ...


4

I think there will be an increasing amount of debate about this in the next few years. The above answers from Tim Osborne and P. Elliot give a lot of general discussion about how to compare these two forms of grammar, but no comparison with respect to specific constructions. I provide a lot of this in my article in the proceedings from the second Depling ...


4

There are several different views on the acceptability of trees where a mother has more than two daughters (i.e. non-binary branching). Much current work in the Minimalist Program (e.g. the Sportiche work cited) allows only binary trees. In earlier versions of syntactic theory (e.g. Chomsky 1981), non-binary trees were allowed. And in some alternatives to ...


4

Your question is tagged for NLTK, but if you're free to switch, Stanford NLP has a product called Tregex which does exactly this kind of tree search. You might also be able to shell out to the Tregex binary, which has a fairly useful CLI as well. See documentation on TregexPattern#main for more. You can find some introductory documentation here. (...


4

Summarizing the paper by Zwicky and Pullum commented by @sumelic above: They suggest that most contractions are clitics, but <-n't> is an inflection. Most English contractions, such as <-'s> <-'ve> <-'d>, behave like clitics that can be directly substituted for the words they abbreviate. One of their examples is "The ball you hit's just broken ...


4

Good question. Constituency is the theory behind such a tree diagram. There are a bunch of different Constituency tests which you can do on paper: [ [John] [ [hit] [ [ [the] ] [ball] ] ] ] Wh-substitution: [John]: Who hit the ball? [the]: John hit which ball? Wh-substitution and do-support-substitution: [hit]: John did what to the ball? Importantly, ...


3

It's not clear from your question whether you are wondering just about syntactic structure trees for the sentences you gave or about syntactic structure trees more generally. If the latter, it might be useful to note that syntactic structure trees may provide different kinds of information: constituent structure, the syntactic categories of constituents, ...


3

jlawler writes that non-terminal (node) is, in fact, the correct term here. He also notes that, if you want to be extremely formal, you can call it a labeled non-terminal node.


3

Since the one has an article, it seems fair to treat it like a (pro)noun, so it functions as a noun subject complement. For whom you are looking is as a whole a relative clause modifying the one, so I would make it one branch from the "predicate nominative" down, so the two branches would be the one and for whom you are looking. Then I would probably ...


3

There are quite a few tools which can do this. For example: Tregex mentioned by Jon Gauthier. I know a few others: PML-TQ https://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pmltq/ Tundra https://weblicht.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/tundra-beta Iness search Among them, I know Tundra best since I used to work in the group who created it. Tundra has a very nice UI based on bootstrap, as ...


3

If you are looking for parse trees according to your grammar, the first tree seems correct, up to the missing N symbols, and a missing NOM above fleas. However your second diagram should look as follow, drawing only the relevant part that changes (i.e. under NOM_1): NOM 1 __/ \___ / \ NOM PP / | \...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible