Re: THEORY: Adpositional Heads

Rob Haden sikyal:

> On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 12:53:04 -0500, Nik Taylor <yonjuuni@...>
> wrote:
>
> >Well, as I recall, the head is defined as the word that defines what the
> >phrase is.  I.e., a verb defines a verb phrase, a noun defines a noun
> >phrase, hence, an adposition defines an adpositional phrase.
>
> Good point.  However, I wonder if one could re-interpret adpositional
> phrases as noun phrases?
The actual linguistic trend is the opposite--"plain" NP's are
reinterpreted as some other kind of phrase!

Vaguely speaking, the theory goes like this: There are a variety of heads
that indicate "case", where "case" is interpreted broadly to mean
"function in the sentence". Some of these heads are manifest as overt
words: adpositions. Others are phonologically obscured and incorporated
with the words they govern: case endings. Functionally, the two are the
same.

(Of course it's more complicated than that, but syntax is not my forte so
I don't want to launch into a full description here.)


--
Jesse S. Bangs jaspax@u.washington.edu
http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/
http://students.washington.edu/jaspax/blog

Jesus asked them, "Who do you say that I am?"

And they answered, "You are the eschatological manifestation of the ground
of our being, the kerygma in which we find the ultimate meaning of our
interpersonal relationship."

And Jesus said, "What?"