Welsh soft mutation and Word Grammar

1. Welsh soft mutation and Word Grammar Dick Hudson LAGB Edinburgh 2009

2. Welsh data 1 • TELYN = ‘harp’ normally = telyn • Changes by ‘soft mutation’ (SM) to delyn • Lexical SM: • e.g. ei telyn ‘her harp’ • but ei delyn ‘his harp’ • Syntactic SM (SSM): • e.g. Prynodd y ddynes delyn bought the woman harp ‘The woman bought a harp’

3. Questions • What are the syntactic triggers for SSM? • What do they tell us about syntactic structure? • Two competing theories here: • XP Trigger Hypothesis (XPTH) • 1977: Borsley, Tallerman, … • Dependency Distance Hypothesis (DDH) • 2004: me • 2009: Excellent evaluation by Tallerman

4. XP Trigger Hypothesis (XPTH) • Based on phrase structure • “A complement bears SM if it is immediately preceded by a c-commanding phrase.” (Borsley via Tallerman) • [Prynodd [y ddynes]XP [delyn]] bought the woman harp • As with lexical SM, triggered by immediately preceding environment target trigger

5. Dependency Distance Hypothesis (DDH) • Based on dependency structure (Word Grammar) • ‘Valent’: subject or complement • SSM applies to any valent D2 which is: • after the head word H • and separated by another dependent of H, D1 • (so ‘dependency distance’ of D2 > 0). trigger target dependency distance = 2 D1 D2 H Prynodd y ddynes delyn bought the woman harp dependency distance = 0

6. Word Grammar Theory • Classified dependencies • dependent = valent or adjunct • valent = subject or complement • complement = object or predicative • Landmarks, for word order • landmark = is-before or is-after • by default, a word’s landmarks are: • its parent • its (nearest) sisters

7. For example, … dependent valent adjunct complement subject object predicative D1 D2 H Prynodd y ddynes delyn bought the woman harp after after

8. Towards a grammar for SSM • SM words are syntactically distinct • cf Steedman, pace Hannahs, Neeleman • Any mutated token (‘Doken’) is-a SM word • ADoken = D2 is a valent of H • D2 is-after H and D1, another dependent of H • I.e. SM applies to non-initial valents • pace Steedman: valents have SM except when adjacent SM word non-initial valent valent doken = D2 H D1 is-after is-after

9. Why mutate non-initial valents? • To guide hearers through potentially long dependencies. … … … … … D1 … Doken H • To trigger extra activation???

10. Coordination • SM only applies to first conjuncts Prynodd y ddynes delyn, c/*gorn a ffidil. bought the woman harp horn and fiddle • Because only first conjuncts take the shared head as landmark • Other conjuncts take their position from the first or from the conjunction • so they’re not ‘non-initial valents’

11. Hard problems for DDH • If Doken isn’t the first word in its phrase Dw i lawn mor grac â chi. am I full as angry as you ‘I’m just as angry as you.’ • 2. If D1 doesn’t separate H from Doken • Pwy brynodd delyn? Prynodd delyn. • who bought harp? bought harp H H D2 D1 D2

12. Problem 1:‘the first word in a phrase’ • Hard to express without phrases • but most phrases are head-initial • so D2 = Doken • But also hard with phrases, • because the phrase is only indirectly linked to its first word. • [Dw [i] [[[lawn mor] grac][â chi]]]. • Worse still, the phrase is always remote from its first word.

13. A solution for Word Grammar • DistinguishDoken from D2 in syntax. • Let Doken depend on both D1 and D2. • so it must stand between them • and not be mixed up with their dependents • Doken shares its realization with the next word. • they merge at the level of form or phonology • cf “you + are” realized jointly as {you’re}

14. For example, … Dw i llawn mor grac â chi. Doken realization {dw} {i} {lawn} {mor} {grac} {â} {chi}

15. Problem 2:Missing subjects • D1 doesn’t separate H from D2 • Pwy brynodd delyn? Prynodd delyn. who bought harp? bought harp • Generalisation: complementsalways have SM. • to be revised shortly • better than empty categories

16. Against empty categories “… there are good reasons to try to eliminate empty categories from any theory of syntactic competence. There is something of the night to the whole idea of phonetically invisible but syntactically present entities. They greatly complicate the problem of natural language processing, because (unlike real words) they could be anywhere…” (Steedman)

17. Why mutate complements? • To distinguish V+O from V+S • cf Roberts • Gwelodd gath. = V + O saw cat ‘He/she saw a cat’ • Gwelodd cath. = V + S saw cat ‘A cat saw.’

18. But no SSM for complements of … … non-finite verbs. Dymunodd y ddynes weld cath wanted the woman see cat ‘The woman wanted to see a cat’ … impersonal verbs. Gwelir ci. ‘Someone sees a dog.’ o s p Vnon-fin Vfin s

19. A better grammar for SSM • Trigger 1: any valent has SM if it is-after: • its parent and • a sister of its parent. • Trigger 2: any complement of a finite personal verb has SM if it is-after its parent. • Both cases are exceptional • so trigger extra activation ???? • cf Iosad; pace Steedman

20. In a network dependent valent adjunct complement non-initial D2 • finite Doken D1 comp of finite • • Impersonals: tba Doken

21. But ddim, …. • ddim, ‘not’, blocks SM • Gwnaeth Megan gysgu. did Megan sleep ‘Megan slept’ • Gwnaeth Megan ddim cysgu. did Megan not sleep ‘Megan didn’t sleep’ • Unlike other negators, e.g. eriodd ‘never’ • Why?

22. and elliptical coordination Aeth i weld eglwys Llandaff yn y bore went to see church Llandaff in the morning ac yn y prynhawn g/castell Caerdydd. and in the afternoon castle Cardiff ‘He went to see Llandaff church in the morning and in the afternoon, Cardiff castle. ’

23. Why is SM optional? • MT: there’s an optional hiatus which blocks SM • but why is this hiatus linked to coordination? • But if not that, what?

24. Conclusion • SSM signals two exceptional cases: • a non-subject valent • a non-initial valent • Both of these signals help the hearer. • Classified dependencies work. • They avoid empty categories. • They’re motivated.