291:, since they are dependency-based. In other words, dependency-based structures are necessarily endocentric, i.e. they are necessarily headed structures. Dependency grammars by definition were much less capable of acknowledging the types of divisions that constituency enables. Acknowledging exocentric structure necessitates that one posit more nodes in the syntactic (or morphological) structure than one has actual words or morphs in the phrase or sentence at hand. What this means is that a significant tradition in the study of syntax and grammar has been incapable from the start of acknowledging the endo- vs. exocentric distinction, a fact that has generated confusion about what should count as an endo- or exocentric structure.
610:), however. One might therefore argue instead that coordinate structures like these are multi-headed, each conjunct being or containing a head. The difficulty with this argument, however, is that the traditional endocentric vs. exocentric distinction did not foresee the existence of multi-headed structures, which means that it did not provide a guideline for deciding whether a multi-headed structure should be viewed as endo- or exocentric. Coordinate structures thus remain a problem area for the endo- vs. exocentric distinction in general.
567:
317:
category distinct from X or Y. The two dependency trees show the manner in which dependency-based structures are inherently endocentric. Since the number of nodes in the tree structure is necessarily equal to the number of elements (e.g. words) in the string, there is no way to assign the whole (i.e. XY) a category status that is distinct from both X and Y.
218:(IP), which is essentially a projection of the verb (a fact that makes the sentence a big VP in a sense). Thus, with the advent of X-bar theory, the endocentric vs. exocentric distinction started to become less important in transformational theories of syntax, for without the concept of exocentricity, the notion of endocentricity was becoming vacuous.
236:. As constraint-based models such as LFG do not represent a "deep structure" at which non-configurational languages can be treated as configurational, the exocentric S is used to formally represent the flat structure inherent in a non-configurational language. Hence, in a constraints-based analysis of
605:
The brackets each time mark the conjuncts of a coordinate structure, whereby this coordinate structure includes the material appearing between the left-most bracket and the right-most bracket; the coordinator is positioned between the conjuncts. Coordinate structures like these do not lend themselves
164:
An exocentric construction consists of two or more parts, whereby the one or the other of the parts cannot be viewed as providing the bulk of the semantic content of the whole. Further, the syntactic distribution of the whole cannot be viewed as being determined by the one or the other of the parts.
506:. As such, Warlpiri sentences exhibit exceptionally flat surface structure. If a non-derivational approach is taken to syntactic structure, this can best be formalised with exocentric S dominated by the auxiliary in I. Thus, an example analysis of the constituent structure of the Warlpiri sentence:
336:
This tree structure contains four divisions, whereby only one of these division is exocentric (the highest one). The other three divisions are endocentric because the mother node has the same basic category status as one of its daughters. The one exocentric division disappears in the corresponding
606:
to an endocentric analysis in any clear way, nor to an exocentric analysis. One might argue that the coordinator is the head of the coordinate structure, which would make it endocentric. This argument would have to ignore the numerous occurrences of coordinate structures that lack a coordinator (
299:
Theories of syntax (and morphology) represent endocentric and exocentric structures using tree diagrams and specific labeling conventions. The distinction is illustrated here using the following trees. The first three trees show the distinction in a constituency-based grammar, and the second two
316:
The upper two trees on the left are endocentric since each time, one of the parts, i.e. the head, projects its category status up to the mother node. The upper tree on the right, in contrast, is exocentric, because neither of the parts projects its category status up to the mother node; Z is a
574:
Where S is a non-projected exocentric structure which dominates both heads and phrases with equal weight. The elements in spec of IP and under S can be freely moved and switch places, as position in c-structure, except for I, plays a pragmatic rather than syntactic role in a constraints-based
152:, which is an adjective. In more formal terms, the distribution of an endocentric construction is functionally equivalent, or approaching equivalence, to one of its parts, which serves as the center, or head, of the whole. An endocentric construction is also known as a
112:
These phrases are indisputably endocentric. They are endocentric because the one word in each case carries the bulk of the semantic content and determines the grammatical category to which the whole
583:
While exocentric structures have largely disappeared from most theoretical analyses of standard sentence structure, many theories of syntax still assume (something like) exocentric divisions for
308:
353:
Dependency positions the finite verb as the root of the entire tree, which means the initial exocentric division is impossible. This tree is entirely endocentric.
320:
Traditional phrase structure trees are mostly endocentric, although the initial binary division of the clause is exocentric (S → NP VP), as mentioned above, e.g.
345:
240:, an exocentric structure follows the auxiliary, dominating all of the verb, arguments and adjuncts which are not raised to the specifier position of the IP:
328:
214:
in the 1970s, this traditional exocentric division was largely abandoned and replaced by an endocentric analysis, whereby the sentence is viewed as an
800:
Emonds, J. 1976. A transformational approach to
English syntax: Root, structure-preserving, and local transformations. New York: Academic Press.
625:
Matthews (1981:147) provides an insightful discussion of the endo- vs. exocentric distinction. See Falk (2001:43ff., 49ff.) as well.
879:
803:
Falk, Y. 2001. Lexical-Functional
Grammar: An introduction to parallel constraint-based syntax. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
679:
Arcodia, Giorgio
Francesco. (2007). Chinese: A language of compound words? In F. Montermini, G. Boyé, & N. Hathout (Eds.),
874:
232:(LFG), exocentric constructions are still widely used, but with a different role. Exocentricity is used in the treatment of
198:
Since the whole is unlike either of its parts, it is exocentric. In other words, since the whole is neither a noun (N) like
705:
Chang, S.-M. & Tang, T.-C. (2009). On the Study of
Compounds: A Contrastive Analysis of Chinese, English and Japanese.
503:
233:
894:
307:
884:
584:
229:
844:
113:
859:
284:
256:
222:
211:
166:
79:
43:
779:
Barri, Nimrod. Note terminologique: endocentrique-exocentrique. Linguistics 163, November 1975, pp. 5–18.
819:
Wujastyk, Dominik. 1982. Bloomfield and the
Sanskrit Origin of the Terms 'Exocentric' and 'Endocentric'. In
31:
839:
371:
260:
51:
793:
652:
Concerning the lack of exocentric structures in dependency grammar, see
Osborne et al. (2019: 48-50).
344:
327:
287:(= constituency grammars), since they are constituency-based. The distinction is hardly present in
215:
177:
98:
and one or more dependents, whose presence serves to modify the meaning of the head. For example:
849:
782:
288:
225:
95:
83:
63:
499:
237:
170:
367:
145:
75:
810:
570:
Constituent structure tree diagram for
Warlpiri sentence "the man is spearing the kangaroo"
889:
67:
868:
718:
Liao, W.-W. R. (2014). Morphology. In C.-T. Huang, Y.-H. Li, & A. Simpson (Eds),
566:
788:
207:
71:
744:
Scalise, S., Fábregas, A., & Forza, F. (2009). Exocentricity in
Compounding.
180:
173:
133:
121:
661:
Concerning the status of S as an exocentric construction, see Emonds (1976:15).
758:
Hale, K. (1983). "Warlpiri and the grammar of non-configurational languages".
394:. The Coordinative, Verb-Complement, and Endocentric types are also known as
833:
607:
272:
27:
Distinction between phrases that have a primary word ("head") and that don't
17:
165:
The classic instance of an exocentric construction is the sentence (in a
806:
Matthews, P. H. 1981. Syntax. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press.
374:. Linguists often classify compound verbs in Chinese into five types:
854:
156:
construction, where the head is contained "inside" the construction.
47:
681:
Selected
Proceedings of the 5th Décembrettes: Morphology in Toulouse
58:
if it fulfils the same linguistic function as one of its parts, and
696:(Rev. ed.). Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press.
565:
536:
409:
Below are a few examples of the exocentric compounds in Chinese.
814:
547:
525:
206:
but rather a sentence (S), it is exocentric. With the advent of
515:
300:
trees show the same structures in a dependency-based grammar:
169:). The traditional binary division of the sentence (S) into a
683:(pp. 79-90). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
811:
A Dependency Grammar of English: An Introduction and Beyond
62:
if it does not. The distinction reaches back at least to
271:. For a class of compounds described as exocentric, see
731:
Zhang, N. N. (2007). Root merger in Chinese compounds.
94:
An endocentric construction consists of an obligatory
283:
The endo- vs. exocentric distinction is possible in
707:Journal of Taiwanese Languages and Literature, 3
86:all constructions are necessarily endocentric.
66:'s work of the 1930s, who based it on terms by
502:is widely held as the canonical example of a
263:seem to require an exocentric analysis, e.g.
8:
295:Representing endo- and exocentric structures
634:See Bloomfield (1933), 194–196 and 235–237.
694:A Practical Chinese Grammar for Foreigners
575:analysis of Warlpiri sentence structure.
259:, the distinction remains, since certain
78:. Such a distinction is possible only in
722:(pp. 3-25). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.
411:
823:, Volume IX, no 1/2 (1982). pp 179–184.
785:. 1933. Language. New York: Henry Holt.
618:
140:, which is a verb. The same is true of
760:Natural Language and Linguistic Theory
279:The distinction in dependency grammars
692:Li, D.-J. & Cheng, M.-Z. (2008).
7:
556:man-ERG AUX kangaroo.ABS spear-NPAST
720:The Handbook of Chinese Linguistics
579:A note about coordinate structures
559:'the man is spearing the kangaroo'
249:'The man is spearing the kangaroo'
82:(constituency grammars), since in
25:
553:Ngarrka-ngku ka wawirri panti-rni
343:
326:
306:
34:, a distinction is made between
670:See for example Chomsky (1957).
487:spear + shield → contradictory
128:, which is a noun. Similarly,
1:
815:https://doi.org/10.1075/z.224
813:. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
465:keep + defend → conservative
234:non-configurational languages
116:will be assigned. The phrase
821:Historiographica Linguistica
504:non-configurational language
255:In addition, in theories of
202:nor a verb phrase (VP) like
476:item + color → choose from
911:
797:. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.
599:or go to that conference?
230:Lexical Functional Grammar
845:Constituent (linguistics)
370:is known for having rich
285:phrase structure grammars
189:Hannibal destroyed Rome.
80:phrase structure grammars
860:Phrase structure grammar
746:言語研究 (Gengo Kenkyu), 135
212:Transformational Grammar
167:phrase structure grammar
90:Endocentric construction
44:grammatical construction
880:Syntactic relationships
160:Exocentric construction
32:theoretical linguistics
840:Compound (linguistics)
733:Studia Linguistica, 61
571:
454:open + close → switch
376:Subject-Predicate 主謂結構
148:in line with its part
136:in line with its part
124:in line with its part
875:Linguistic morphology
836:(exocentric compound)
585:coordinate structures
569:
563:would be as follows:
183:(VP) was exocentric:
794:Syntactic Structures
443:good + bad → anyhow
384:Verb-Complement 述補結構
783:Bloomfield, Leonard
432:big + small → size
289:dependency grammars
84:dependency grammars
895:Dependency grammar
850:Dependency grammar
809:Osborne, T. 2019.
572:
418:Internal Structure
269:Bill is a have-not
226:syntactic theories
885:Generative syntax
500:Warlpiri language
491:
490:
388:Coordinative 並列結構
337:dependency tree:
216:inflection phrase
192:
46:(for instance, a
42:constructions. A
16:(Redirected from
902:
768:
767:
755:
749:
742:
736:
729:
723:
716:
710:
703:
697:
690:
684:
677:
671:
668:
662:
659:
653:
650:
644:
643:Wujastyk (1982).
641:
635:
632:
626:
623:
549:
538:
527:
517:
412:
406:, respectively.
400:Verb-Resultative
392:Endocentric 偏正結構
380:Verb-Object 述賓結構
368:Chinese language
347:
330:
310:
223:constraint-based
221:By contrast, in
190:
146:adjective phrase
76:Sanskrit grammar
54:) is said to be
21:
910:
909:
905:
904:
903:
901:
900:
899:
865:
864:
830:
776:
771:
757:
756:
752:
743:
739:
730:
726:
717:
713:
704:
700:
691:
687:
678:
674:
669:
665:
660:
656:
651:
647:
642:
638:
633:
629:
624:
620:
616:
581:
561:
551:
540:
529:
519:
496:
364:
359:
297:
281:
162:
92:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
908:
906:
898:
897:
892:
887:
882:
877:
867:
866:
863:
862:
857:
852:
847:
842:
837:
829:
826:
825:
824:
817:
807:
804:
801:
798:
786:
780:
775:
772:
770:
769:
750:
737:
724:
711:
698:
685:
672:
663:
654:
645:
636:
627:
617:
615:
612:
603:
602:
601:
600:
597:
594:
580:
577:
541:
530:
520:
509:
508:
495:
492:
489:
488:
485:
482:
478:
477:
474:
471:
467:
466:
463:
460:
456:
455:
452:
449:
445:
444:
441:
438:
434:
433:
430:
427:
423:
422:
419:
416:
363:
360:
358:
355:
351:
350:
349:
348:
334:
333:
332:
331:
314:
313:
312:
311:
296:
293:
280:
277:
253:
252:
251:
250:
247:
204:destroyed Rome
196:
195:
194:
193:
191:- Sentence (S)
161:
158:
110:
109:
106:
103:
91:
88:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
907:
896:
893:
891:
888:
886:
883:
881:
878:
876:
873:
872:
870:
861:
858:
856:
853:
851:
848:
846:
843:
841:
838:
835:
832:
831:
827:
822:
818:
816:
812:
808:
805:
802:
799:
796:
795:
790:
789:Chomsky, Noam
787:
784:
781:
778:
777:
773:
765:
761:
754:
751:
747:
741:
738:
735:(2), 170-184.
734:
728:
725:
721:
715:
712:
708:
702:
699:
695:
689:
686:
682:
676:
673:
667:
664:
658:
655:
649:
646:
640:
637:
631:
628:
622:
619:
613:
611:
609:
598:
595:
593:and arrived.
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
586:
578:
576:
568:
564:
560:
557:
554:
550:
544:
539:
533:
528:
523:
518:
512:
507:
505:
501:
493:
486:
483:
480:
479:
475:
472:
469:
468:
464:
461:
458:
457:
453:
450:
447:
446:
442:
439:
436:
435:
431:
428:
425:
424:
420:
417:
414:
413:
410:
407:
405:
404:Modifier-Head
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
373:
369:
361:
356:
354:
346:
342:
341:
340:
339:
338:
329:
325:
324:
323:
322:
321:
318:
309:
305:
304:
303:
302:
301:
294:
292:
290:
286:
278:
276:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
248:
245:
244:
243:
242:
241:
239:
235:
231:
227:
224:
219:
217:
213:
209:
205:
201:
188:
187:
186:
185:
184:
182:
179:
175:
172:
168:
159:
157:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
115:
107:
104:
101:
100:
99:
97:
89:
87:
85:
81:
77:
73:
69:
65:
61:
57:
53:
49:
45:
41:
37:
33:
19:
820:
792:
763:
759:
753:
745:
740:
732:
727:
719:
714:
706:
701:
693:
688:
680:
675:
666:
657:
648:
639:
630:
621:
604:
582:
573:
562:
558:
555:
552:
545:
542:
534:
531:
524:
521:
513:
511:Ngarrka-ngku
510:
497:
421:Explanation
408:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
365:
357:In languages
352:
335:
319:
315:
298:
282:
268:
264:
254:
220:
208:X-bar theory
203:
199:
197:
163:
153:
149:
141:
137:
129:
125:
117:
111:
93:
59:
55:
39:
35:
29:
766:(1): 39–76.
181:verb phrase
176:(NP) and a
174:noun phrase
144:; it is an
134:verb phrase
122:noun phrase
114:constituent
56:endocentric
36:endocentric
869:Categories
774:References
709:, 179-213.
596:She and .
459:保守bǎo-shǒu
448:開關kāi-guān
390:(VV), and
257:morphology
228:, such as
130:sing songs
64:Bloomfield
60:exocentric
40:exocentric
18:Exocentric
834:Bahuvrihi
608:asyndeton
543:panti-rni
535:kangaroo.
481:矛盾máo-dùn
440:A-A → Adv
437:好歹hǎo-dǎi
426:大小dà-xiǎo
372:compounds
273:bahuvrihi
261:compounds
178:predicate
142:very long
118:big house
72:Patañjali
828:See also
791:. 1957.
748:, 49-84.
494:Warlpiri
396:Parallel
265:have-not
238:Warlpiri
200:Hannibal
52:compound
587:, e.g.
532:wawirri
484:N-N → A
473:N-N → V
470:物色wù-sè
462:V-V → A
451:V-V → N
429:A-A → N
415:Example
362:Chinese
171:subject
890:Syntax
855:Phrase
546:spear-
402:, and
386:(VC),
382:(VO),
378:(SP),
154:headed
68:Pāṇini
48:phrase
614:Notes
548:NPAST
132:is a
126:house
120:is a
514:man-
498:The
366:The
150:long
138:sing
96:head
70:and
38:and
537:ABS
526:AUX
516:ERG
267:in
210:in
74:in
50:or
30:In
871::
762:.
522:ka
398:,
275:.
246:]]
764:2
108:]
105:]
102:]
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.