Types of phrase
In some cases, particularly with noun and adjective phrases, it is not always clear which dependents are to be classed as complements, and which as adjuncts. Although in principle the head-directionality parameter concerns the order of heads and complements only, considerations of head-initiality and head-finality sometimes take account of the position of the head in the phrase as a whole, including adjuncts. The structure of the various types of phrase is analyzed below in relation to specific languages, with a focus on the ordering of head and complement. In some cases (such as English and Japanese) this ordering is found to be the same in practically all types of phrase, whereas in others (such as German and Gbe) the pattern is less consistent. Different theoretical explanations of these inconsistencies are discussed later in the article. There are various types of phrase in which the ordering of head and complement(s) may be considered when attempting to determine the head directionality of a language, including: * Verb Phrase: the head ofHead-initial languages
English
Indonesian
Dependency perspective
When examining Indonesian through a dependency perspective, it is considered head initial as theWord order perspective
The subject of the sentence followed by the verb, representing SVO order. The following examples demonstrate head-initial directionality inHead-final languages
Japonic: Japanese
_Turkic:_Turkish
C_to.html"_;"title="sub>TP_Mary-ga_oyog-ana-katta.html"_;"title="sub>CP_[TP_Mary-ga_oyog-ana-katta">sub>CP_[TP_Mary-ga_oyog-ana-katta[C_to">sub>TP_Mary-ga_oyog-ana-katta.html"_;"title="sub>CP_[TP_Mary-ga_oyog-ana-katta">sub>CP_[TP_Mary-ga_oyog-ana-katta[C_to_Turkic:_Turkish
Turkish_language">Turkish_Turkic:_Turkish
Turkish_language">Turkish_Turkic:_Turkish
Turkish_language">Turkish_Turkic:_Turkish
Turkish_language">Turkish_Turkic:_Turkish
Turkish_language">TurkishTurkic: Turkish
Turkish language">Turkish Turkish may refer to: *a Turkic language spoken by the Turks * of or about Turkey ** Turkish language *** Turkish alphabet ** Turkish people, a Turkic ethnic group and nation *** Turkish citizen, a citizen of Turkey *** Turkish communities and mi ...Head-final Tense Phrase
In Turkish, tense is denoted by a case marking suffix on the verb. [TP [VP et][T -tiHead-final Verb Phrase
In neutral prosody, Turkish verb phrases are primarily head-final, as the verb comes after its complement. Variation in object-verb ordering is not strictly rigid. However, constructions where the verb precedes the object are less common. VP_[DP_çikolata">sub>VP_[DP_çikolataV_sever.html" ;"title="sub>DP_çikolata.html" ;"title="sub>VP [DP çikolata">sub>VP [DP çikolataV sever">sub>DP_çikolata.html" ;"title="sub>VP [DP çikolata">sub>VP [DP çikolataV severHead-final Determiner Phrase
In Turkish, definite determiners may be marked with a case marker suffix on the noun, such as when the noun is the direct object of a verb. They may also exist as free morphemes that attach to a head-initial determiner phrase, such as when the determiner is a demonstrative. Like other case markers in Turkish, when the morpheme carrying the demonstrative meaning is a case marker, they attach at the end of the word. As such, the head of the phrase, in this case the determiner, follows its complement like in the example below: [DP [NP kitap-lar][D -ıHead-final Postpositional Phrase
Turkish adpositions are postpositions that can affix as a case marker at the end of a word. They can also be a separate word that attaches to the head-final postpositional phrase, as is the case in the example below: PP_[DP_Ahmet">sub>PP_[DP_AhmetP_için.html" ;"title="sub>DP_Ahmet.html" ;"title="sub>PP_Word_order_variation_in_matrix_clauses
Turkish_employs_a_Grammatical_case.html" "title="sub>DP Ahmet">sub>PP [DP AhmetP için">sub>DP_Ahmet.html" ;"title="sub>PP [DP Ahmet">sub>PP [DP AhmetP içinWord order variation in matrix clauses
Turkish employs a Grammatical case">case marking A grammatical case is a category of nouns and noun modifiers (determiners, adjectives, participles, and numerals), which corresponds to one or more potential grammatical functions for a nominal group in a wording. In various languages, nomina ...Mixed word-order languages
Indo-European: German
German grammar, German, while being predominantly head-initial, is less conclusively so than in the case of English. German also features certain head-final structures. For example, in a nonfinite verb, nonfinite verb phrase the verb is final. In a finite verb phrase (or tense/aspect phrase) the verb (tense/aspect) is initial, although it may move to final position in a subordinate clause. In the following example, the non-finite verb phrase ''es finden'' is head-final, whereas in the tensed main clause ''ich werde es finden'' (headed by the auxiliary verb ''werde'' indicating future tense), the finite auxiliary precedes its complement (as an instance of a verb-second construction; in the example below, this V2-position is called "T"). :[TP [DP Ich] [T werde] [VP [DP es] [V finden] Noun phrases containing complements are head-initial; in this example the complement, the CP ''der den Befehl überbrachte'', follows the head noun ''Boten''. :[NP [N Boten] [CP der den Befehl überbrachte Adjective phrases may be head-final or head-initial. In the next example the adjective (''stolze'') follows its complement (''auf seine Kinder''). :[AP [PP auf seine Kinder] [A stolze However, when essentially the same adjective phrase is used predicative adjective, predicatively rather than attributively, it can also be head-initial: :[AP [A stolz] [PP auf seine Kinder Most adpositional phrases are head-initial (as German has mostly prepositions rather than postpositions), as in the following example, where ''auf'' comes before its complement ''den Tisch'': :[PP [P auf] [DP den Tisch German also has some postpositions, however (such as ''gegenüber'' "opposite"), and so adpositional phrases can also sometimes be head-final. Another example is provided by the analysis of the following sentence: :[PP [DP das Dach] [P hinauf Like in English, determiner phrases and complementizer phrases in German are head-initial. The next example is of a determiner phrase, headed by the article ''der'': :[DP [D der] [NP Mann In the following example, the complementizer ''dass'' precedes the tense phrase which serves as its complement: :[CP [C dass] [TP Lisa eine Blume gepflanzt hatSino-Tibetan: Chinese
Standard Chinese (whose syntax is typical of varieties of Chinese, Chinese varieties generally) features a mixture of head-final and head-initial structures. Noun phrases are head-final. Modifiers virtually always precede the noun they modify. For examples of this involving relative clauses, see . In the case of strict head/complement ordering, however, Chinese appears to be head-initial. Verbs normally precede their objects. Both prepositions and postpositions are reported, but the postpositions can be analyzed as a type of noun (the prepositions are often called coverbs). For more details and examples of the relevant structures, see Chinese grammar. For a head-direction analysis of Chinese aspect phrases, see the theoretical section below.Niger-Congo: Gbe
In Gbe, a mixture of head-initial and head-final structures is found. For example, a verb may appear after or before its complement, which means that both head-initial and head-final verb phrases occur. In the first example the verb for "use" appears after its complement: :[VP [DP àmí lɔ́] [V zân In the second example the verb precedes the complement: :[VP [V zán] [DP àmí lɔ́ It has been debated whether the first example is due to object syntactic movement, movement to the left side of the verb or whether the lexical entry of the verb simply allows head-initial and head-final structures. Tense phrases and aspect phrases are head-initial since aspect markers (such as ''tó'' and ''nɔ̀ '' above) and tense markers (such as the future marker ''ná'' in the following example, but that does not apply to tense markers shown by verb inflection) come before the verb phrase. :[TP [T ná] [VP xɔ̀ kɛ̀kɛ́ Gbe noun phrases are typically head-final, as in this example: :[NP [KP Kɔ̀kú sín] [N ɖìdè In the following example of an adjective phrase, Gbe follows a head-initial pattern, as the head ''yù'' precedes the intensifier ''tàùú''. :[AP [A yù] [Int tàùú Gbe adpositional phrases are head-initial, with prepositions preceding their complement: :[PP [P xlán] [DP Àsíbá Determiner phrases, however, are head-final: :[DP [NP àvɔ̀ àmàmú màtàn-màtàn] [D ɖé Complementizer phrases are head-initial: :[CP [C ɖé] [TP Dòsà gb xwé ɔ̀ ɔ̀Theoretical views
Tesnière: dependency grammar
The idea that syntactic structures reduce to binary relations was introduced by Lucien Tesnière in 1959 within the framework of dependency grammar, dependency theory, which was further developed in the 1960s. Tesnière distinguished two structures that differ in the placement of the structurally governing element (head (grammar), head): centripetal structures, in which heads precede their dependent (grammar), dependents, and centrifugal structures, in which heads follow their dependents. Dependents here may include complement (grammar), complements, Adjunct (grammar), adjuncts, and specifiers.Greenberg: typology
Joseph Greenberg, who worked in the field of language typology, put forward an implicational theory ofLehmann: Fundamental Principle of Placement
Winfred P. Lehmann, expanding upon Greenberg's theory, proposed a Fundamental Principle of Placement (FPP) in 1973. The FPP states that the order of object and verb relative to each other in a language determines other features of that language's typology, beyond the features that Greenberg identified. Lehmann also believed that the subject is not a primary element of a sentence, and that the traditional six-order typology of languages should be reduced to just two, VO and OV, based on head-directionality alone. Thus, for example, SVO and VSO would be considered the same type in Lehmann’s classification system.Chomsky: principles and parameters
Noam Chomsky's Principles and Parameters theory in the 1980s introduced the idea that a small number of innate principles are common to every human language (e.g. phrases are oriented around heads), and that these general principles are subject to parametric variation (e.g. the order of heads and other phrasal components may differ). In this theory, the dependency relation between heads, complements, specifiers, and adjuncts is regulated by X-bar theory, proposed by Jackendoff in the 1970s. The complement is sister to the head, and they can be ordered in one of two ways. A head-complement order is called a head-initial structure, while a complement-head order is called a head-final structure. These are special cases of Tesnière's centripetal and centrifugal structures, since here only complements are considered, whereas Tesnière considered all types of dependents. In the principles and parameters theory, a head-directionality parameter is proposed as a way of linguistic typology, classifying languages. A language which has head-initial structures is considered to be a head-initial language, and one which has head-final structures is considered to be a head-final language. It is found, however, that very few, if any, languages are entirely one direction or the other. Linguists have come up with a number of theories to explain the inconsistencies, sometimes positing a more consistent underlying representation, underlying order, with the phenomenon of phrasal syntactic movement, movement being used to explain the surface deviations.Kayne: antisymmetry
According to the Antisymmetry theory proposed by Richard S. Kayne, there is no head-directionality parameter as such: it is claimed that at an underlying level, all languages are head-initial. In fact, it is argued that all languages have the underlying order Specifier-Head-Complement. Deviations from this order are accounted for by different syntactic movements applied by languages. Kayne argues that a theory that allows both directionalities would imply an absence of asymmetry, asymmetries between languages, whereas in fact languages fail to be symmetrical in many respects. Kayne argues using the concept of a probe-goal search (based on the ideas of the Minimalist program), whereby aGradient classification
Some scholars, such as Tesnière, argue that there are no absolute head-initial or head-final languages. According to this approach, it is true that some languages have more head-initial or head-final elements than other languages do, but almost any language contains both head-initial and head-final elements. Therefore, rather than being classifiable into fixed categories, languages can be arranged on a Continuum (measurement), continuum with head-initial and head-final as the extremes, based on the frequency distribution of their Dependency grammar, dependency directions. This view was supported in a study by Haitao Liu (2010), who investigated 20 languages using a dependency treebank-based method. For instance, Japanese is close to the head-final end of the continuum, while English and German, which have mixed head-initial and head-final dependencies, are plotted in relatively intermediate positions on the continuum. Polinsky (2012) identified the following five head-directionality sub-types: * Rigid head-final languages, includingSee also
*Dependency grammar *Dependent-marking language *Double-marking language *Government (linguistics) *Government and binding theory *Head (linguistics) *Head-driven phrase structure grammar *Head-marking language *Minimalist grammar *Transformational grammar *Word order *Zero-marking language *Polish notationNotes
Bibliography
* * * * * *Noam Chomsky, Chomsky, Noam. (1981). ''Lectures on Government and Binding''. Foris Publications. * * * * * Matthew Dryer, Dryer, Matthew S. (2009). The Branching Direction Theory of Word Order Correlations Revisited. In S. Scalise, E. Magni, & A. Bisetto (Eds.), ''Universals of Language Today'' (pp. 185–207). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Springer. * * * * * * * * Ray Jackendoff, Jackendoff, Ray. (1977). X Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Cambridge: MIT Press. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * {{Refend Linguistic typology Word order Generative syntax