Bekki, Daisuke. (2015). In Empirical Advances in Categorial Grammar (CG2015) in the 27th European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information (ESSLLI 2015), Barcelona, Spain.

1. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Two Types of Japanese Scrambling in
Combinatory Categorial Grammar
Daisuke Bekki
Ochanomizu University / CREST, Japan Science and Technology Agency /
National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology / National
Institute of Informatics
Empirical Advances in Categorial Grammar (CG2015)
ESSLLI2015, Barcelona,
August 11th (Tue), 2015.
http://www.slideshare.net/kaleidotheater/cg2015slide
1 / 51

2. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What this talk is about
Target phenomena: scrambling in Japanese
Syntactic framework: combinatory categorial grammar (CCG:
Steedman (1996), Bekki (2010))
1. A full-fledged categorial analysis of Japanese scrambling (cf.
Deep and surface scrambling (Ueyama, 1998, 2003))
2. Advantage of categorial grammar (in general) over minimalism
3. Methodological difference between CCG and type-logical
grammars
2 / 51

3. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What this talk is about
Target phenomena: scrambling in Japanese
Syntactic framework: combinatory categorial grammar (CCG:
Steedman (1996), Bekki (2010))
1. A full-fledged categorial analysis of Japanese scrambling (cf.
Deep and surface scrambling (Ueyama, 1998, 2003))
2. Advantage of categorial grammar (in general) over minimalism
3. Methodological difference between CCG and type-logical
grammars
2 / 51

4. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What this talk is about
Target phenomena: scrambling in Japanese
Syntactic framework: combinatory categorial grammar (CCG:
Steedman (1996), Bekki (2010))
1. A full-fledged categorial analysis of Japanese scrambling (cf.
Deep and surface scrambling (Ueyama, 1998, 2003))
2. Advantage of categorial grammar (in general) over minimalism
3. Methodological difference between CCG and type-logical
grammars
2 / 51

5. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What this talk is about
Target phenomena: scrambling in Japanese
Syntactic framework: combinatory categorial grammar (CCG:
Steedman (1996), Bekki (2010))
1. A full-fledged categorial analysis of Japanese scrambling (cf.
Deep and surface scrambling (Ueyama, 1998, 2003))
2. Advantage of categorial grammar (in general) over minimalism
3. Methodological difference between CCG and type-logical
grammars
2 / 51

6. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What this talk is about
Target phenomena: scrambling in Japanese
Syntactic framework: combinatory categorial grammar (CCG:
Steedman (1996), Bekki (2010))
1. A full-fledged categorial analysis of Japanese scrambling (cf.
Deep and surface scrambling (Ueyama, 1998, 2003))
2. Advantage of categorial grammar (in general) over minimalism
3. Methodological difference between CCG and type-logical
grammars
2 / 51

7. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What this talk is about
Target phenomena: scrambling in Japanese
Syntactic framework: combinatory categorial grammar (CCG:
Steedman (1996), Bekki (2010))
1. A full-fledged categorial analysis of Japanese scrambling (cf.
Deep and surface scrambling (Ueyama, 1998, 2003))
2. Advantage of categorial grammar (in general) over minimalism
3. Methodological difference between CCG and type-logical
grammars
2 / 51

8. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Combinatory categorial grammar (CCG) (1/2)
Definition (Function application rules)
X/Y : f Y : a
X : fa
>
Y : a XY : f
X : fa
<
Definition (Function composition rules)
X/Y : f Y/Z : g
X/Z : λx.f(gx)
>B
Y Z : g XY : f
XZ : λx.f(gx)
<B
Definition (Coordination rule)
S : f1 · · · CONJ : ◦ S : fm
S : f1 ◦ · · · ◦ fm
Φ
3 / 51

9. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Combinatory categorial grammar (CCG) (2/2)
Definition (Functional crossed composition rule)
X/Y : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.f(gx)
>B×
Y/Z : g XY : f
X/Z : λx.f(gx)
<B×
Definition (Functional crossed substitution rules)
(X/Y )Z : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.fx(gx)
>S×
Y/Z : g (XY )/Z : f
X/Z : λx.fx(gx)
<S×
Definition (Type raising rules)
X : a
T /(T X) : λf.fa
>T
X : a
T (T /X) : λf.fa
<T
4 / 51

10. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Two types of scrambling
constructions in Japanese
5 / 51

11. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
First glance: Is word order in Japanese free?
Word-orders of ditransitive sentences: all 3!=6 patterns are
allowed in Japanese:
(1) a. NPNOM NPDAT NPACC DTV
b. NPNOM NPACC NPDAT DTV
c. NPDAT NPNOM NPACC DTV
d. NPDAT NPACC NPNOM DTV
e. NPACC NPNOM NPDAT DTV
f. NPACC NPDAT NPNOM DTV
(when neither quantification nor binding is involved).
6 / 51

12. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Is Japanese ’non-configurational’?
Configurationality parameters: Hale (1980)
Japanese is classified as a nonconfigurational language, with the
other free word order language like Warlpiri.
Under this view, the derivation of (1) has the flat structure as
shown in (2).
(2) S → NP∗
V
7 / 51

13. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Japanese as a configurational language
Weak Crossover (in canonical word-order)
(3) English (Postal (1971))
a. ok Every boy loves his father.
b. * His father loves every boy.
=⇒ Subject-object assymmetry
(4) Japanese in canonical word-order (Hoji (1985))
a. ok QPNOM [...it...]DAT|ACC V
b. * [...it...]NOM QPDAT|ACC V
=⇒ Subject-object assymmetry (*flat structures)
Then, how the scrambling constructions are derived?
8 / 51

14. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Scrambling as movement
Harada (1977) pointed out that the scrambling in Japanese obeys
the subjacency, and thus is an instance of syntactic movement.
(5) Long-distance scrambling and complex-NP constraint
a. NPDAT|ACC NPNOM [NPNOM t V]-that V
b. * NPDAT|ACC NPNOM [NPNOM t V]-rel-NDAT|ACC V
1. JP scrambling is unbounded (thus Hale (1980)
undergenerates) → Puzzle 0
2. JP scrambling subjects to some form of subjacency (though
the status of (5b) is controversial).
9 / 51

15. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Puzzle 1: Reconstruction effects
Reconstruction effects in long-distance scrambling:
(6) a. [... it ...]DAT|ACC NPNOM [QPNOM t V]-that V
b. * QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM [NPNOM t V]-that V
In long-distance scrambling, a dislocated NP is obligatorily
interpreted in the trace position (Saito (1992)).
Long-distance scrambling is generated by a movement in PF?
(Ueyama (1998, 2003))
10 / 51

16. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Puzzle 2: Absence of WCO
Weak Crossover (in canonical word-order): repeated
(7) English (Postal (1971))
a. ok Every boy loves his father.
b. * His father loves every boy.
=⇒ Subject-object assymmetry
(8) Japanese in canonical word-order (Hoji (1985))
a. ok QPNOM [...it...]DAT|ACC V
b. * [...it...]NOM QPDAT|ACC V
=⇒ Subject-object assymmetry (*flat structures)
11 / 51

17. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Puzzle 2: Absence of WCO
Weak Crossover (in scrambled word-order)
(9) Japanese in scrambled word-order (Hoji (1985), Ueyama
(1998))
a. ok QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM t V
b. ok [... it ...]DAT|ACC QPNOM t V
=⇒ Subject-object assymmetry dissapears!
=⇒ (9b) shows a reconstruction effect, but how (9a) is licenced?
12 / 51

18. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the puzzles
JP scrambling seems to be an unbounded
syntactic movement.
Why reconstruction effect?
Why ok?: QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM t V
13 / 51

19. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the puzzles
JP scrambling seems to be an unbounded
syntactic movement.
Why reconstruction effect?
Why ok?: QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM t V
13 / 51

20. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the puzzles
JP scrambling seems to be an unbounded
syntactic movement.
Why reconstruction effect?
Why ok?: QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM t V
13 / 51

21. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Non-uniform analysis (Saito (1992), Ueyama (1998, 2003))
There are two types of scrambling constructions in Japanese:
Surface scrambling: Generated by the unbounded scrambling
operation (e.g. PF movement), in which a dislocated
NP is interpreted at its trace position, thus
reconstruction effect obtains.
Deep scrambling: Generated by the clause-bounded scrambling
operation (e.g. operator movement), in which a
dislocated NP is interpreted at its landing site.
14 / 51

22. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Solution to Puzzle 1 and 2 in minimalism
(10) Japanese in canonical word-order (Hoji (1985))
a. ok QPNOM [...it...]DAT|ACC V
b. * [...it...]NOM QPDAT|ACC V (WCO)
(11) Japanese in scrambled word-order (Hoji (1985), Ueyama
(1998))
a. ok QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM t V
(Deep scrambling)
b. ok [... it ...]DAT|ACC QPNOM t V
(Surface scrambling)
c. ok NPDAT|ACC NPNOM t V
(Ambiguous between Surface and Deep) 15 / 51

23. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Puzzle 3: ‘Non-standard’-constituent coordination and
mixed scrambling
Kang (1987) observed that the coordination between
‘non-standard’-constituents of canonical and scrambled orders is
available in Korean (which is also the case in Japanese).
(12) [NPACC NPNOM] and [NPNOM NPACC] V
Surface scrambling (ok):
(13) [ [... it ...]DAT|ACC QPNOM t ] and [NPNOM NPACC] V
Deep scrambling (ok):
(14) [ QPDAT|ACC [...it...]NOM t ] and [NPNOM NPACC] V
How can they be generated?
16 / 51

24. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Puzzle 4: One deep scrambling per clause?
Ueyama (1998) observed that only one deep scrambling is allowed
per clause.
(15) a. * QPDAT [...it...]-rel-NACC-Q [...it...]NOM t t V
b. * QPACC [...it...]-rel-NDAT-Q [...it...]NOM t t V
(i.e. In “NPDAT NPACC NPNOM V” order, either NPDAT or NPACC
is dislocated by surface scrambling. But why?)
17 / 51

25. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Not a matter of complexity
(16) a. * QPDAT [...it...]-rel-NACC-Q [...it...]NOM t t V
b. * QPACC [...it...]-rel-NDAT-Q [...it...]NOM t t V
c. ok QP NOM
[...it...]-rel-N DAT
-Q [...it...] ACC
t t V
18 / 51

26. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of Japanese scrambling
Ueyama (1998, 2003)’s non-uniform analysis
(deep and surface scrambling) succeeds in giving
a solution to Puzzle 1 and 2, but not to Puzzle
3 and 4.
Puzzle 3 is fatal for minimalism.
Two problems awaiting solution:
“Translation” of Ueyama (1998)’s analysis to categorial
grammar is not obvious: PF scrambling?
How can Puzzle 3 and 4 be solved?
19 / 51

27. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of Japanese scrambling
Ueyama (1998, 2003)’s non-uniform analysis
(deep and surface scrambling) succeeds in giving
a solution to Puzzle 1 and 2, but not to Puzzle
3 and 4.
Puzzle 3 is fatal for minimalism.
Two problems awaiting solution:
“Translation” of Ueyama (1998)’s analysis to categorial
grammar is not obvious: PF scrambling?
How can Puzzle 3 and 4 be solved?
19 / 51

28. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of Japanese scrambling
Ueyama (1998, 2003)’s non-uniform analysis
(deep and surface scrambling) succeeds in giving
a solution to Puzzle 1 and 2, but not to Puzzle
3 and 4.
Puzzle 3 is fatal for minimalism.
Two problems awaiting solution:
“Translation” of Ueyama (1998)’s analysis to categorial
grammar is not obvious: PF scrambling?
How can Puzzle 3 and 4 be solved?
19 / 51

29. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of Japanese scrambling
Ueyama (1998, 2003)’s non-uniform analysis
(deep and surface scrambling) succeeds in giving
a solution to Puzzle 1 and 2, but not to Puzzle
3 and 4.
Puzzle 3 is fatal for minimalism.
Two problems awaiting solution:
“Translation” of Ueyama (1998)’s analysis to categorial
grammar is not obvious: PF scrambling?
How can Puzzle 3 and 4 be solved?
19 / 51

30. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of Japanese scrambling
Ueyama (1998, 2003)’s non-uniform analysis
(deep and surface scrambling) succeeds in giving
a solution to Puzzle 1 and 2, but not to Puzzle
3 and 4.
Puzzle 3 is fatal for minimalism.
Two problems awaiting solution:
“Translation” of Ueyama (1998)’s analysis to categorial
grammar is not obvious: PF scrambling?
How can Puzzle 3 and 4 be solved?
19 / 51

31. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Surface scrambling in CCG
20 / 51

32. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Surface Scrambling by CB
We claim that there exists a pair of (language-specific)
combinatory rules <CB and >CB, which we call permuted
functional composition rules:
Definition (Permuted functional composition rules)
Y/Z : g X/Y : f
X/Z : λx.f(g(x))
>CB
XY : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.f(g(x))
<CB
We assume that each language optionally employs one or both of
the CB rules, with Japanese (and possibly other languages with
scrambling constructions such as Korean and Turkish) employing
only >CB as a rule for deriving surface scrambling.
21 / 51

33. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Surface Scrambling by CB
Definition (The reduction rule for the combinator C)
Cfxy = fyx
∴ CBfgx = Bgfx = f(g(x))
The CB rules are variations of the functional composition rule
B with its arguments scrambled by the C combinator: the
>CB (and <CB) rule swaps the applicable order of two
adjacent functions g and f so that the function g on the left
(right) applies first to the rightward (leftward) argument, to
which the function f on the right (left) applies latter.
22 / 51

34. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Surface Scrambling by CB
Definition (The reduction rule for the combinator C)
Cfxy = fyx
∴ CBfgx = Bgfx = f(g(x))
The CB rules are variations of the functional composition rule
B with its arguments scrambled by the C combinator: the
>CB (and <CB) rule swaps the applicable order of two
adjacent functions g and f so that the function g on the left
(right) applies first to the rightward (leftward) argument, to
which the function f on the right (left) applies latter.
22 / 51

35. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Surface Scrambling by CB
Definition (The reduction rule for the combinator C)
Cfxy = fyx
∴ CBfgx = Bgfx = f(g(x))
The CB rules are variations of the functional composition rule
B with its arguments scrambled by the C combinator: the
>CB (and <CB) rule swaps the applicable order of two
adjacent functions g and f so that the function g on the left
(right) applies first to the rightward (leftward) argument, to
which the function f on the right (left) applies latter.
22 / 51

36. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P1) Surface scrambling by CB and reconstruction effect
(without movement)
Linguistically, the left function corresponds a dislocated constituent
that is yet interpreted in its original position, thus yielding a
reconstruction effect.
NPACC
dislocated NP
T /(T NPo)
: λp.λx.Q2(y)(pyx)
NPNOM
T / (T NPga)
: λp.λx.Q1(x)(pxx)
T /(T NPgaNPo)
: λp.λx.Q1(x)(Q2(y)(pyxx))
>CB
V
SNPgaNPo
: λy.λx.V(x, y)
S
: Q1(x)(Q2(y)(V(x, y)))
>
23 / 51

37. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P0) Long-distance scrambling by CB
... iti ...DAT
dislocated NP
T /(T NPni )
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
[QPi
NOM
T /(T NPga)
T /(T NPgaNPga)
>B
T /(T NPgaNPgaNPni )
>CB
V1]
SNPgaNPni
-that
StoS
StoNPgaNPni
<B V2
SNPgaSto
SNPgaNPgaNPni
<B
S
24 / 51

38. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P0) Long-distance scrambling by CB
V1]
SNPgaNPni
-that
StoS
StoNPgaNPni
<B V2
SNPgaSto
SNPgaNPgaNPni
<B
25 / 51

39. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P0) Long-distance scrambling by CB
... iti ...DAT
dislocated NP
T /(T NPni )
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
[QPi
NOM
T /(T NPga)
T /(T NPgaNPga)
>B
T /(T NPgaNPgaNPni )
>CB
26 / 51

40. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P0) Long-distance scrambling by CB
... iti ...DAT
dislocated NP
T /(T NPni )
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
[QPi
NOM
T /(T NPga)
T /(T NPgaNPga)
>B
T /(T NPgaNPgaNPni )
>CB
V1]
SNPgaNPni
-that
StoS
StoNPgaNPni
<B V2
SNPgaSto
SNPgaNPgaNPni
<B
S
27 / 51

41. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P3) ’Non-standard’ constituent and mixed coordination by
CB
NPACC
dislocated NP
T /(T NPo)
NPNOM
T /( T NPga )
T /(T NPgaNPo)
>CB
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
NPACC
T /(T NPo)
T /(T NPgaNPo)
>B
T /(T NPgaNPo)
Φ
V
SNPgaNPo
S
>
28 / 51

42. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling in CCG
29 / 51

43. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling by B×
Functional crossed composition rules >B× and <B× are
non-harmonic rules often used for extraction from
non-right-peripheral cases in English.
The >B× rule is also suggested as a source of (deep)
scrambling construction in Steedman (2000).
Definition (Functional crossed composition rules)
X/Y : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.f(g(x))
>B×
Y/Z : g XY : f
X/Z : λx.f(g(x))
<B×
30 / 51

44. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling by B×
Functional crossed composition rules >B× and <B× are
non-harmonic rules often used for extraction from
non-right-peripheral cases in English.
The >B× rule is also suggested as a source of (deep)
scrambling construction in Steedman (2000).
Definition (Functional crossed composition rules)
X/Y : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.f(g(x))
>B×
Y/Z : g XY : f
X/Z : λx.f(g(x))
<B×
30 / 51

45. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling by B×
Functional crossed composition rules >B× and <B× are
non-harmonic rules often used for extraction from
non-right-peripheral cases in English.
The >B× rule is also suggested as a source of (deep)
scrambling construction in Steedman (2000).
Definition (Functional crossed composition rules)
X/Y : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.f(g(x))
>B×
Y/Z : g XY : f
X/Z : λx.f(g(x))
<B×
30 / 51

46. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling by B×
NPACC
dislocated NP
T /(T NPo)
: λp.λx.Q2(y)(pyx)
NPNOM
T / (T NPga)
: λp.λx.Q1(x)(pxx)
V
SNPga NPo
: λy.λx.V(x, y)
StermNPo
: λy.Q1(x)(V(x, y))
>B×
S
: Q2(y)(Q1(x)(V(x, y)))
>
31 / 51

47. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Problem of B× as a souce of deep scrambling
Coordinations of the form OS and OS V are not generated.
NPACC
dislocated NP
T /(T NPo)
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
T /(T NPoNPga)
>B
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
NPACC
T /(T NPo)
T /(T NPgaNPo)
>B
∗
32 / 51

48. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P2) Deep scrambling by Bu
× rules
Unary functional crossed composition rules >Bu
× and <Bu
×
are variations of Geach rule corresponding to B×.
(Potentially problematic to parsing)
Definition (Unary functional crossed composition rules)
X/Y : f
XZ/(Y Z) : λg.λx.f(g(x))
>Bu
×
XY : f
X/Z(Y/Z) : λg.λx.f(g(x))
<Bu
×
cf. Functional crossed composition rules
X/Y : f Y Z : g
XZ : λx.f(g(x))
>B×
Y/Z : g XY : f
X/Z : λx.f(g(x))
<B×
33 / 51

49. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P2) Deep scrambling by Bu
× rules
NPACC
dislocated NP
T /(T NPo)
: λp.λx.Q2(y)(pyx)
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
: λp.λx.Q1(x)(pxx)
T T /( T NPga T )
: λg.λy.λx.Q1(x)(gyxx)
>Bu
× V
StermNPgaNPo
: λy.λx.V(x, y)
StermNPo
: λy.Q1(x)(V(x, y))
>
S
: Q2(y)(Q1(x)(V(x, y)))
>
34 / 51

50. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P3) ’Non-standard’ constituent and mixed coordination by
Bu
×
NPACC
dislocated NP
T /(T NPo)
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
T T /( T NPga T )
>Bu
×
T /(T NPgaNPo)
>B
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
NPACC
T /(T NPo)
T /(T NPgaNPo)
>B
T /(T NPgaNPo)
Φ V
StermNPgaNPo
S
>
35 / 51

51. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
(P4) Why only one deep scrambling per clause?
(16) a. * QPDAT|ACC [...it...]-rel-NACC|DAT-Q [...it...]NOM t t V
NPNOM
T /(T NPga)
: λp.λx.Q1(x)(pxx)
T T /( T NPga T )
: λg.λy.λx.Q1(x)(gyxx)
>Bu
× V
StermNPgaNPni NPo
: λz.λy.λx.V(x, y, z)
∗
The >Bu2
× rule (or even the generalized >Bun
× rule) that licences
(16) is also definable (but we claim that it is not employed in
Japanese).
36 / 51

52. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

53. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

54. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

55. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

56. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

57. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

58. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

59. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

60. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
37 / 51

61. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Not completely satisfied
Problem 1: Only scrambling constructions use CB and Bu
×
Problem 2: The Bu
× rules are not safe in parsing.
Problem 3: Why is Japanese scrambling optional? What
surface scrambling constructions are for?
38 / 51

62. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Not completely satisfied
Problem 1: Only scrambling constructions use CB and Bu
×
Problem 2: The Bu
× rules are not safe in parsing.
Problem 3: Why is Japanese scrambling optional? What
surface scrambling constructions are for?
38 / 51

63. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Not completely satisfied
Problem 1: Only scrambling constructions use CB and Bu
×
Problem 2: The Bu
× rules are not safe in parsing.
Problem 3: Why is Japanese scrambling optional? What
surface scrambling constructions are for?
38 / 51

64. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Not completely satisfied
Problem 1: Only scrambling constructions use CB and Bu
×
Problem 2: The Bu
× rules are not safe in parsing.
Problem 3: Why is Japanese scrambling optional? What
surface scrambling constructions are for?
38 / 51

65. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Derivations in Hybrid TLCG
39 / 51

66. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling in Hybrid TLCG
Hybrid TLCG: Kubota (2015), Kubota and Levine (2015)
Definition (Deep and surface scrambling rules in Hybrid TLCG)
f;
S|(S|NP);
Q
λσ.f(id) • σ( );
S|(S|NP);
Q
ds
f;
S|(S|NP);
Q
λσ.f(id) • σ(id)( );
S|(S|(S|(S|NP)));
λp.p(Q)
ss
40 / 51

67. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Deep scrambling in Hybrid TLCG
λσ.σ(NPACC);
S|(S|NPo);
Q
λσ.NPACC • σ( );
S|(S|NPo);
Q
ds
NPNOM;
NPga;
t
ϕ;
NPo;
y
1
V ;
SNPgaNPo;
v
ϕ • V ;
SNPga;
vy
E
NPNOM • ϕ • V ;
S;
vyt
E
λϕ.NPNOM • ϕ • V ;
S|NPga;
λy.vyt
|I ,1
NPACC • NPNOM • • V ;
S;
Q(λy.vyt)
|E
41 / 51

68. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Multiple deep scrambling in a clause!
λσ.σ(NPDAT);
S|(S|NPni );
P
λσ.NPDAT • σ( );
S|(S|NPni );
P
ds
λσ.σ(NPACC);
S|(S|NPga);
Q
λσ.NPACC • σ( );
S|(S|NPo);
Q
ds
NPNOM;
NPga;
t
ψ;
NPni ;
z
2
ϕ;
NPo;
y
1
V ;
SNPgaNPni NPo;
v
ϕ • V ;
SNPgaNPni ;
vy
E
ψ • ϕ • V ;
SNPga;
vyz
E
NPNOM • ψ • ϕ • V ;
S;
vyzt
E
λϕ.NPNOM • ψ • ϕ • V ;
S|NPga;
λy.vyzt
|I ,1
NPACC • NPNOM • ψ • V ;
S;
Q(λy.vyzt)
|E
λψ.NPACC • NPNOM • ψ • V ;
S|NPo;
λz.Q(λy.vyzt)
|I
NPDAT • NPACC • NPNOM • V ;
S;
P(λz.Q(λy.vyzt))
|E
42 / 51

69. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Surface scrambling in Hybrid TLCG
λσ.σ(NPACC);
S|(S|NPo);
Q2
λσ.NPACC • σ(id)( );
S|(S|(S|(S|NPo)));
λp.p(Q2)
ss
λσ.σ(QPNOM);
S|(S|NPga);
Q1
χ;
S|(S|NPo);
f
3
ψ;
NPga;
x
2
ϕ;
NPo;
y
1
V ;
SNPgaNPo;
v
ϕ • V ;
SNPga;
vy
E
ψ • ϕ • V ;
S;
vyx
E
λϕ.ϕ • ϕ • V ;
S|NPo;
λy.vyx
|I ,1
χ(λϕ.ψ • ϕ • V );
S;
f(λy.vyx)
|E
λψ.χ(λϕ.ψ • ϕ • V );
S|NPga;
λx.f(λy.vyx)
|I ,2
χ(λϕ.QPNOM • ϕ • V );
S;
Q1(λx.(f(λy.vyx)))
|E
λχ.χ(λϕ.QPNOM • ϕ • V );
S|(S|(S|NPo));
λf.Q1(λx.(f(λy.vyx)))
|I ,3
NPACC • NPNOM • V ;
S;
Q1(λx.Q2(λy.vyx))
|E
43 / 51

70. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Discussion
44 / 51

71. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
In CCG, the rule Bu
× and the rule Bu2
× can be distinguished,
which may not be the case in TLGs.
Some quantifiers allow inverse scope reading, while others are
not (at least in Japanese).
45 / 51

72. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
In CCG, the rule Bu
× and the rule Bu2
× can be distinguished,
which may not be the case in TLGs.
Some quantifiers allow inverse scope reading, while others are
not (at least in Japanese).
45 / 51

73. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
In CCG, the rule Bu
× and the rule Bu2
× can be distinguished,
which may not be the case in TLGs.
Some quantifiers allow inverse scope reading, while others are
not (at least in Japanese).
45 / 51

74. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
Extractions in Lambek/ACG/Hybrid TLCG is the
/-introduction rules.
CCG is a substructural/subdirectional combinatory logic,
where the (weak version of) /-introduction rules hold as a
partial deduction theorem: Buszkowski (2010), Ozaki and
Bekki (2012)
The fact that the CCG axioms can be derived as theorems in
TCG DOES NOT mean that TCG is simpler than CCG: (a
weak-version of) /-introduction rules can be proven as a
theorem in combinatory logic.
46 / 51

75. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
Extractions in Lambek/ACG/Hybrid TLCG is the
/-introduction rules.
CCG is a substructural/subdirectional combinatory logic,
where the (weak version of) /-introduction rules hold as a
partial deduction theorem: Buszkowski (2010), Ozaki and
Bekki (2012)
The fact that the CCG axioms can be derived as theorems in
TCG DOES NOT mean that TCG is simpler than CCG: (a
weak-version of) /-introduction rules can be proven as a
theorem in combinatory logic.
46 / 51

76. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
Extractions in Lambek/ACG/Hybrid TLCG is the
/-introduction rules.
CCG is a substructural/subdirectional combinatory logic,
where the (weak version of) /-introduction rules hold as a
partial deduction theorem: Buszkowski (2010), Ozaki and
Bekki (2012)
The fact that the CCG axioms can be derived as theorems in
TCG DOES NOT mean that TCG is simpler than CCG: (a
weak-version of) /-introduction rules can be proven as a
theorem in combinatory logic.
46 / 51

77. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
CCG (family) vs. TCG (family)
Extractions in Lambek/ACG/Hybrid TLCG is the
/-introduction rules.
CCG is a substructural/subdirectional combinatory logic,
where the (weak version of) /-introduction rules hold as a
partial deduction theorem: Buszkowski (2010), Ozaki and
Bekki (2012)
The fact that the CCG axioms can be derived as theorems in
TCG DOES NOT mean that TCG is simpler than CCG: (a
weak-version of) /-introduction rules can be proven as a
theorem in combinatory logic.
46 / 51

78. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What JP scrambling means for Categorial Grammars?
Categorial grammars have succeeded in explaining both:
Unbounded A’-movements by (/I) or (>B) rules (in other
words, by the deduction theorem)
Clause-bounded A-movements, such as in control structures.
The status of JP scrambling has been an important topic in
generative grammar: can it be reduced to either A’-movement
or A-movement, or is it another type of movement?
General question: can some version of CG analyse JP
scrambling? How are the surface and deep scrambling
generated therein?
47 / 51

79. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What JP scrambling means for Categorial Grammars?
Categorial grammars have succeeded in explaining both:
Unbounded A’-movements by (/I) or (>B) rules (in other
words, by the deduction theorem)
Clause-bounded A-movements, such as in control structures.
The status of JP scrambling has been an important topic in
generative grammar: can it be reduced to either A’-movement
or A-movement, or is it another type of movement?
General question: can some version of CG analyse JP
scrambling? How are the surface and deep scrambling
generated therein?
47 / 51

80. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What JP scrambling means for Categorial Grammars?
Categorial grammars have succeeded in explaining both:
Unbounded A’-movements by (/I) or (>B) rules (in other
words, by the deduction theorem)
Clause-bounded A-movements, such as in control structures.
The status of JP scrambling has been an important topic in
generative grammar: can it be reduced to either A’-movement
or A-movement, or is it another type of movement?
General question: can some version of CG analyse JP
scrambling? How are the surface and deep scrambling
generated therein?
47 / 51

81. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What JP scrambling means for Categorial Grammars?
Categorial grammars have succeeded in explaining both:
Unbounded A’-movements by (/I) or (>B) rules (in other
words, by the deduction theorem)
Clause-bounded A-movements, such as in control structures.
The status of JP scrambling has been an important topic in
generative grammar: can it be reduced to either A’-movement
or A-movement, or is it another type of movement?
General question: can some version of CG analyse JP
scrambling? How are the surface and deep scrambling
generated therein?
47 / 51

82. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What JP scrambling means for Categorial Grammars?
Categorial grammars have succeeded in explaining both:
Unbounded A’-movements by (/I) or (>B) rules (in other
words, by the deduction theorem)
Clause-bounded A-movements, such as in control structures.
The status of JP scrambling has been an important topic in
generative grammar: can it be reduced to either A’-movement
or A-movement, or is it another type of movement?
General question: can some version of CG analyse JP
scrambling? How are the surface and deep scrambling
generated therein?
47 / 51

83. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
What JP scrambling means for Categorial Grammars?
Categorial grammars have succeeded in explaining both:
Unbounded A’-movements by (/I) or (>B) rules (in other
words, by the deduction theorem)
Clause-bounded A-movements, such as in control structures.
The status of JP scrambling has been an important topic in
generative grammar: can it be reduced to either A’-movement
or A-movement, or is it another type of movement?
General question: can some version of CG analyse JP
scrambling? How are the surface and deep scrambling
generated therein?
47 / 51

84. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Summary of the CCG analysis: repeated
CB rules for surface scrambling :
P0 Long-distance scrambling
P1 Reconstruction effect
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
Bu
× rules for deep scrambling :
P2 Absence of WCO
P3 ’Non-standard’-constituent and mixed
coordination
P4 The ’one-per-clause’ constraint
48 / 51

85. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Reference I
Bekki, D. (2010) Nihongo-Bunpoo-no Keisiki-Riron -
Katuyootaikei, Toogohantyuu, Imigoosei - (trans. ’Formal
Japanese Grammar: the conjugation system, categorial syntax,
and compositional semantics’). Tokyo, Kuroshio Publisher.
Buszkowski, W. (2010) “Categorial Grammars and Substructural
Logics”.
Hale, K. (1980) “Remarks on Japanese phrase structure:
comments on the papers on Japanese syntax”, MIT Working
Papers in Linguistics 2, pp.185–203.
Harada, S.-I. (1977) “Nihongo-ni ‘Henkei’-wa Hituyoo-da
(‘Transformation’ is Necessary for Japanese)”, Gengo 6(11-12).
49 / 51

86. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Reference II
Hoji, H. (1985) “Logical Form Constraints and Configurational
Structures in Japanese”, Doctoral dissertation, University of
Washington.
Kang, B.-m. (1987) “Functional Inheritance, Anaphora, and
Semantic Interpretation in a Generalized Categorial Grammar”,
Ph.d. thesis, Brown University.
Ozaki, H. and D. Bekki. (2012) “Extractability as Deduction
Theorem in Subdirectional Combinatory Logic”, In the
Proceedings of Logical Aspect of Computational Linguistics
(LACL2012). Nantes, France.
Postal, P. (1971) Cross-over Phenomena. New York, Holt,
Reinhart and Winston.
Saito, M. (1992) “Long Distance Scrambling in Japanese”, Journal
of East Asian Linguistics 1(1), pp.69–118.
50 / 51

87. JP Scrambling Surface scrambling Deep scrambling Hybrid TLCG Discussion
Reference III
Steedman, M. J. (1996) Surface Structure and Interpretation.
Cambridge, The MIT Press.
Steedman, M. J. (2000) The Syntactic Process (Language,
Speech, and Communication). Cambridge, The MIT Press.
Ueyama, A. (1998) “Two Types of Dependency”, Doctoral
dissertation, University of Southern California. distributed by
GSIL publications.
Ueyama, A. (2003) “Two Types of Scrambling Constructions in
Japanese”, In: A. Barss (ed.): Anaphora: A Reference Guide.
Cambridge, Blackwell.
51 / 51