scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Head (linguistics)

About: Head (linguistics) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2540 publications have been published within this topic receiving 29023 citations. The topic is also known as: nucleus.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present two additional empirical arguments in favor of uniqueness, drawn from well-known properties of causative constructions and noun incorporation, for head-driven phrase structure grammars.
Abstract: In recent work in generative grammar, one finds two approaches concerning the projection of heads onto phrases. On the one hand, in the Govemment-Binding/Minimalist Program tradition it has commonly been assumed that a projection inherits all the properties of its head and nothing else, a principle that Brody (1998) refers to as Uniqueness. On the other hand, in Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG) and its predecessors it is explicitly assumed that features of a complement of X can project to XP, so a projection of X ends up richer than its head. Therefore, whether Uniqueness holds between a projection and its head is an issue that needs to be resolved. So far, within minimalism only a conceptual argument has been presented in favor of Uniqueness, that of Chomsky's (1995) theory of bare phrase structure. In this squib I present two additional empirical arguments in favor of Uniqueness, drawn from well-known properties of causative constructions and noun incorporation.

7 citations

Patent
16 Jul 1990
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose to produce a summary having the consistence in terms of the structure and the contents of a sentence by extracting an important sentence taking the gist of the contents out of the important words and a logical structure of an original and producing the summary based on the logical structure.
Abstract: PURPOSE:To produce a summary having the consistence in terms of the structure and the contents of a sentence by extracting an important sentence taking the gist of the contents out of the important words and a logical structure of an original and producing the summary based on the logical structure of the original. CONSTITUTION:A syntactic analyzing part 31 analyzes the component elements of the original by means of a sentence structure rule dictionary 14. A noun extracting part 32 extracts the nouns with the use of a Japanese word dictionary 13. A vocabulary statics part 33 takes the statics of the noun vocabularies and stores them into a frequency-based noun table 9. An important word extracting part extracts the words ranging from the head of the table 9 up to 15% in terms of the cumulative using ratio as the most important words and the words having the cumulative using ratio less than 25% as the important words respectively. An important sentence extracting part 35 chooses the important sentences based on the standard of such a sentence where the most important word emerges for a first time. A summary producing part 36 selects the sentences in the desired number according to the volume of the summary set previously and rearranges these selected sentences in the order shown in the original to produce a summary.

7 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is shown that indicative-subjunctive alternation in that/que noun complement clauses is determined by the modality type of the governing noun.
Abstract: The present paper presents a corpus-based contrastive analysis of modality in English and French finite noun complement clauses. On the one hand, we claim on the basis of cross-linguistic and semantic evidence that modality is a common intrinsic feature of nouns that license that/que complement clauses, and, as a consequence, that head nouns are modal stance markers. On the other hand, this paper shows that indicative-subjunctive alternation in that/que noun complement clauses is determined by the modality type of the governing noun. Contrastive analysis of French and English provides evidence to substantiate these claims.

7 citations

01 Jan 2010
TL;DR: This paper studied the prosody of Shingazidja relative clauses and showed that there is no prosodic boundary between a restrictive relative and its head, but that the non-restrictive relative and the cleft phrase separately from their heads.
Abstract: This paper constitutes a first descriptive account of the prosody of Shingazidja relative clauses. After a short description of the morphology of the relative verb, it shows that there is no prosodic boundary between a restrictive relative and its head, on the one hand, but that the non-restrictive relative and the cleft phrase separately from their heads, on the other hand. These results are similar to those of corresponding works on other Bantu languages, such as Bemba or Zulu. However, Shingazidja differs from these languages in that the phrasing of the restrictive relatives varies according to the function of the head: when the head of the nonrestrictive relative is the object of the matrix clause, it phrases separately from what follows.

7 citations


Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20222
202168
202090
201986
201890
201790