search

langsci / 163

A lexicalist account of argument structure
1 stars 0 forks source link

Yes, I think we still do (p. 28) [via PaperHive@docloop] #303

Open docloop[bot] opened 5 years ago

docloop[bot] commented 5 years ago

Annotation imported from PaperHive.

Regarding this part:

a way to analyze argument structure constructions phrasally with inheritance of constraints playing an important role.

Ash Asudeh wrote:

I think we do falsify your claim as a general claim, because we do show that there is 'a way to analyze argument structure constructions phrasally with inheritance of constraints playing an important role.' Your rejection of our argument, I think rests on a few moves that I'll come back to below: 1. A misunderstanding of our analysis of passive; 2. A slight misunderstanding of the general optionality of c-structure elements in LFG; 3. A form of cross-linguistic argumentation that I don't think is entirely valid. I'll return to these points below (I guess I've already discussed the passive issue above, but I'll also try to pick it up again in chapter 5).

_Link to original comment. About docloop._

docloop[bot] commented 5 years ago

Annotation imported from PaperHive.

Stefan Müller wrote:

I do not agree on 1 and 2 (but let's see) and I am curious what you mean by 3.

_Link to original comment. About docloop._