Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:13:48.220Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A valency model for nouns in English1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Thomas Herbst
Thomas Herbst
Affiliation:
University of Augsburg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The distinction between complements and peripheral elements, which is made in valency theory, applies not only to verbs and adjectives but also to nouns (cf. Matthews, 1981: 231–233), as is shown by examples such as the following: (1a) You will not find many signposts to Exeter on Dartmoor, (1b) You will not find many signs for Exeter on Dartmoor. (2a) He presented his arguments against the proposal at the meeting. (2b) He presented his objections to the proposal at the meeting.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , September 1988 , pp. 265 - 301
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allerton, D. J. (1975). Deletion and proform reduction. JL 11. 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allerton, D. J. (1982). Valency and the English verb. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Brinker, K. (1977). Modelle und Methoden der strukturalistischen Syntax. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
Brown, G. & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buysschaert, J. (1982). Criteria for the classification of English adverbials. Brussels: AWLsK.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht & Cinnaminson: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
Cook, W. A. (1979). Case Grammar: development of the matrix model (1970–1978). Washington: Georgetown U.P.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E. (1973). Probleme der strukturellen Semantik. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Coseriu, E. (1979). Sprache, Strukturen und Funktionen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Dowty, D. (1982). Grammatical relations and Montague grammar. In Jacobson, P. & Pullum, G. K.The nature of syntactic representation. Dordrecht: Reidel. 79–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emons, R. (1974). Valenzen englischer Prädikatsverben. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emons, R. (1978). Valenzgrammatik für das Englische. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Emons, R. (1982). Englische Nominale. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Engel, U. (1977). Syntax der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Berlin: Schmidt.Google Scholar
Engel, U. & Schumacher, H. (1976). Kleines Valenzlexikon deutscher Verben. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Fillmore, C. (1977). The case for case reopened. In Cole, P. & Sadock, J. M. (eds), Syntax and semantics 8. Grammatical relations. New York: Academic Press. 59–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G. K. & Sag, I. (1985). Generalized phrase structure grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Götz, D. & Herbst, T. (1988). The survey of English usage and its latest grammar. In Die Neueren Sprachen (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Götze, L. (1974). Zu den Begriffspaaren ‘obligatorisch/fakultativ’ und notwendig/nichtnotwendig' in einer Valenzgrammatik und ihrer Relevanz für den Sprachunterricht. Zielsprache Deutsch 5. 62–71.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1970). Language structure and language function. In Lyons, J. (ed.), New horizons in linguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin. 140–165.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hawkins, R. (1981). On ‘Generating indirect objects in English’: a reply to Allerton. JL 17. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helbig, G. (1983). Valenz und Lexikographie. Deutsch als Fremdsprache 137–143.Google Scholar
Helbig, G. & Schenkel, W. (1973). Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution deutscher Verben. (2nd ed.) Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Herbst, T. (1983). Untersuchungen zur Valenz englischer Adjektive und ihrer Nominalisierungen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Herbst, T. (1984a). Adjective complementation: a valency approach to making EFL dictionaries. Applied Linguistics V. 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbst, T. (1984b). Bemerkungen zu den Patternsystemen des Advanced Learner's Dictionary und des Dictionary of Contemporary English. In Götz, D. & Herbst, T. (eds): Theoretische und praktische Probleme der Lexikographie. München: Hueber. 139–165.Google Scholar
Herbst, T. (1986). A proposal for a valency dictionary of English. In Polyglot, vol. 7 (ed. by Ilson, R. and Blanc, M.); C9–E12. Also publ, as: Ilson, R. (ed.): A spectrum of lexicography. (1987). Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 29–47.Google Scholar
Herbst, T., Heath, D. & Dederding, H. M. (1980). Grimm's grandchildren. Current topics in German linguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Heringer, H. J. (1967). Wertigkeiten und nullwertige Verben im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für deutsche Sprache 23. 13–34.Google Scholar
Heringer, H. J. (1970). Theorie der deutschen Syntax. München: Hueber.Google Scholar
Heringer, H. J. (1984). Neues von der Verbszene. In Stickel, G. (ed.). Pragmatik in der Grammatik, Jahrbuch 1983 des Instituts für deutsche Sprache. Düsseldorf: Schwann. 34–64.Google Scholar
Huddleston, R. (1984). Introduction to the grammar of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, R. M. & Bresnan, J. (1982). Lexical-functional grammar: a formal system for grammatical representation. In Bresnan, J. (ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 173–281.Google Scholar
Leech, G. (1969). Towards a semantic description of English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Leech, G. (1981). Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Matthews, P. H. (1981). Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language (CGEL). London: Longman.Google Scholar
von Randow, E. (1986). Valente Substantive des Englischen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Rigter, B. & Beukema, F. (1985). A government and binding approach to English sentence structure. Apeldoorn: Van Walraven.Google Scholar
Sandberg, B. (1982). Zur Valenz der Substantive. Deutsch als Fremdsprache. 272–279.Google Scholar
Sells, P. (1985). Lectures on contemporary syntactic theories. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Somers, H. (1984). On the validity of the complement-adjunct distinction in valency grammar. Linguistics 22. 507–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommerfeldt, K. E. & Schreiber, H. (1974). Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution deutscher Adjektive. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Sommerfeldt, K. E. & Schreiber, H. (1977). Wörterbuch zur Valenz und Distribution der Substantive. Leipzig: VEB Verlag Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
Teubert, W. (1979). Valenz des Substantivs. Düsseldorf: Schwann.Google Scholar
Vater, H. (1978). On the possibility of distinguishing between complements and adjuncts. In Abraham, W. (ed.), Valency, semantic case, and grammatical relations. Amsterdam: John Benjamin. 21–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wotjak, G. (1975). Valenzmodelle und semantische Merkmalanalyse. Linguistische Arbeitsberichte 11. 19–39.Google Scholar