Article published in:
Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 287–310

Unscrambling the lexical nature of weak definites

We investigate how the lexical nature of weak definites influences the phenomenon of direct object scrambling in Dutch. Earlier experiments have indicated that weak definites are more resistant to scrambling than strong definites. We examine how the notion of weak definiteness used in this experimental work can be reduced to lexical connectedness. We explore four different ways of quantifying the relation between a direct object and the verb. Our results show that predictability of a verb given the object (verb cloze probability) provides the best fit to the weak/strong distinction used in the earlier experiments
Published online: 03 December 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.219.12swa
References

References

Aguilar-Guevara, A. & Zwarts, J.
2010 Weak definites and reference to kinds. In Proceedings of SALT 20, N. Li & D. Lutz (eds), 179–196. Ithaca NY: CLC Publications.Google Scholar
Abbott, B.
2004 Definiteness and indefiniteness. In Handbook of Pragmatics, L.R. Horn & G. Ward (eds), 122–149. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Barbier, I.
2000 An experimental study of scrambling and object shift in the acquisition of Dutch. In The Acquisition of Scrambling and Cliticization, S.M. Powers & C. Hamann (eds), 41–69. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Bergen, G. & de Swart, P.
2010 Scrambling in spoken Dutch: Definiteness versus weight as determinants of word order variation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 6(2): 267–295. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, G. & Sussman, R.
2005 Seemingly indefinite definites. In Linguistic Evidence: Empirical, Theoretical, and Computational Perspectives, S. Kepser & M. Reis (eds), 71–86. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, G., Sussman, R., Klein, N. & Tanenhaus, M.
2006 Weak definite NPs. In Proceedings of NELS 36, C. Davis, A.R. Deal & Y. Zabbal (eds). Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
CGN.
2006 Corpus Gesproken Nederlands, Version 2.0. Electronic Resource. <http://​lands​.let​.ru​.nl​/cgn​/home​.htm>.Google Scholar
Diesing, M. & Jelinek, E.
1995 Distributing Arguments. Natural Language Semantics 3(2): 123–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van der Does, J. & de Hoop, H.
1998 Type-shifting and scrambled definites. Journal of Semantics 15(4): 393–416. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, D.
2002 Specificity distinctions. Journal of Semantics 19: 1–13. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farkas, D. & de Swart, H.
2007 Article choice in plural generics. Lingua 117(9): 1657–1676. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Haeseryn, W., Romijn, K., Geerts, G., de Rooij, J., & van den Toorn, M.C.
1997 Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen & Deurne: Martinus Nijhoff uitgevers & Wolters Plantyn. Online edition (e-ANS) <http://​ans​.ruhosting​.nl​/e​-ans​/21​/01​/03​/body​.html>Google Scholar
Hawkins, J.A.
1991 On (in)definite articles: Implicatures and (un)grammaticality prediction. Journal of Linguistics 27: 405–442. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, C.
1999 Definiteness. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Schaeffer, J.C.
2000a The Acquisition of Direct Object Scrambling and Clitic Placement: Syntax and Pragmatics [Language Acquisition and Language Disorders 22]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2000b Scrambling and specificity in Dutch child language. In The Acquisition of Scrambling and Cliticization, S.M. Powers & C. Hamann (eds), 71–93. Dordrecht: Kluwer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Scholten, J. & Aguilar-Guevara, A.
2010 Assessing the discourse referential properties of weak definite NPs. In Linguistics in the Netherlands 27, J. van Kampen & R. Nouwen (eds), 115–128. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Solomon, E. & Pearlmutter, N.
2004 Semantic integration and syntactic planning in language production. Cognitive Psychology 49: 1–46. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Swart, P. & van Bergen, G.
2011+ Definiteness and Adverb-Object Order in Dutch. Ms, University of Groningen/Université Catholique de Louvain.
Unsworth, S.
2005 Child L2, Adult L2, Child L1: Differences and Similarities. A Study on the Acquisition of Direct Object Scrambling in Dutch. PhD dissertation, Utrecht University. Utrecht: LOT Publications.
2007 L1 and L2 acquisition between sentence and discourse: Comparing production and comprehension. Lingua 117: 1930–1958. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wasow, T. & Arnold, J.
2003 Post-verbal constituent ordering in English. In Determinants of Grammatical Variation in English, G. Rohdenburg & B. Mondorf (eds), 119–154. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar