Cover not available

In:Dependency Linguistics: Recent advances in linguistic theory using dependency structures
Edited by Kim Gerdes, Eva Hajičová and Leo Wanner
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 215] 2014
► pp. 1–32

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Dependency in Language

 | Université de Montréal
Published online: 1 October 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.215.01mel
This paper presents a general overview of the notion of linguistic dependency and of its application in formal modeling of Language. Three major types of dependency are distinguished: semantic, syntactic and morphological dependencies; all cases of their 14 possible combinations in a sentence are examined and illustrated. Each type of dependency is characterized in some detail. For syntactic dependency, three sets of formal criteria are introduced; for morphological dependency, its two major subtypes – agreement and government – are described. The main advantages of syntactic dependency are shown, as well as a case of its insufficiency (in coordination). The place and the role of phrases within dependency framework are touched upon. The so-called Bracketing Paradox is briefly discussed.
References (30)
References
Gerdes, K. & Kahane, S. 2007. Phrasing it differently. In Selected Lexical and Grammatical Issues in the Meaning-Text Theory, L. Wanner (ed.), 297–335. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hays, D. 1964. Dependency theory: A formalism and some observations. Language 40(4): 511–525. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iomdin, L. (2010). O modeli russkogo sintaksisa [Modelling Russian syntax]. In Apresjan, Ju., Boguslavskij, I., Iomdin, L. & Sannikov, V., Teoretičeskie problemy russkogo sintaksisa [ Theoretical Problems of Russian Syntax ], pp. 21–43. Jazyki slavjanskix kul’tur, Moskva.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Iordanskaja, L. & Mel’čuk, I. 2009. Establishing an inventory of surface-syntactic relations: Valence-controlled surface-syntactic dependents of the verb in French. In Dependency in Linguistic Description, A. Polguère & I. Mel’čuk (eds), 151–234. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kahane, S. 2003. The Meaning-Text theory. In Dependency and Valency. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 1, V. Agel, L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H.J. Heringer & H. Lobin (eds), 546–570. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mel’čuk, I. 1957. O nekotoryx voprosax MP s vengerskogo jazyka na russkij [On some problems of automatic translation from Hungarian into Russian], Bjulleten¢ ob“edinenija po problemam MP, Vol. 4, 1–75. A more detailed version of this article appeared in Problemy kibernetiki, 1958, 1: 222–264.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1963. Avtomatičeskij analiz tekstov (na materiale russkogo jazyka) [Automatic text analysis (based on Russian data)]. In Slavjanskoe jazykoznanie, 477–509. Moskva: Nauka.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1974. Opyt teorii lingvističeskix modelej «Smysl ⇔ Tekst» [Outline of a theory of Meaning-Text linguistic models]. Moskva: Nauka. (1999: Škola ‘Jazyki russkoj kul¢tury’, Moskva).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1979. Studies in Dependency Syntax. Ann Arbor MI: Karoma.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Meaning-Text models: A recent trend in Soviet linguistics. Annual Review of Anthropology 10: 27–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1988. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. Albany NY: The SUNY Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1992. Paraphrase et lexique: La théorie Sens-Texte et le Dictionnaire explicatif et combinatoire. In Dictionnaire explicatif et combinatoire du français contemporain. Recherches lexico-sémantiques III, I. Mel’čuk et al., 9–58. Montreal: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993. Cours de morphologie générale, Vol. 1: Introduction + Le mot. Montreal & Paris: Les Presses de l’Université de Montréal & CNRS Éditions.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. Vers une linguistique Sens-Texte. Leçon inaugurale. Paris: Collège de France.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. Language: Dependency. In International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, N. Smelser & P. Baltes (eds), 8336–8344. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Levels of dependency in linguistic description: Concepts and problems. In Dependency and Valency. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, Vol. 1, V. Agel, L. Eichinger, H.-W. Eroms, P. Hellwig, H.J. Herringer & H. Lobin (eds), 188–229. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Actants in semantics and syntax, I: Actants in semantics. Linguistics 42(1): 1–66; Actants in semantics and syntax, II: Actants in syntax Linguistics 42(2): 247–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Aspects of the Theory of Morphology. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Dependency in natural language. In Dependency in Linguistic Description, A. Polguère & I. Mel’čuk (eds), 1–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Semantics: From Meaning to Text, Vol. 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mel’čuk, I. & Pertsov, N. 1987. Surface Syntax of English. A Formal Model within the Meaning-Text Framework [Linguistic and Literary Studies in Eastern Europe 13]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mel’čuk, I. & Wanner, L. 2001. Towards a lexicographic approach to lexical transfer in machine translation (illustrated by the German-Russian language pair). Machine Translation 16(1): 21–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006. Syntactic mismatches in machine translation. Machine Translation 20(2): 81–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Morphological mismatches in machine translation. Machine Translation 22(3): 101–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Milićević, J. 2007. La paraphrase. Modélisation de la paraphrase langagière. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
O’Grady, W. 1998. The syntax of idioms. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16: 279–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Polguère, A. & Mel’čuk, I. (eds). 2009. Dependency in Linguistic Description [Studies in Language Companion Series 111]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Robinson, J. 1970. Dependency structures and transformational rules. Language 46(2): 259–285. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwicky, A. 1993. Heads, bases and functors. In Heads in Grammatical Theory, G. Corbett, N. Fraser & S. McGlashan (eds), 292–315. Cambridge: CUP. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Pérez Benavente, Pablo
2021. Régimen y paráfrasis: sobre el tratamiento lexicográfico de las colocaciones verbonominales. ELUA :36 ► pp. 27 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 20 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue