In syntax, c-command is a relationship between nodes in
Contents |
Definition and Example
The definition of c-command is based partly on the relationship of dominance. A node "dominates" another node if it is above it in the tree (it is a parent, grandparent, etc.)
Using this definition of dominance, node A c-commands node B if and only if:
- A does not dominate B
- B does not dominate A
- Every branching node that dominates A, also dominates B[2][3]
For example, in the following tree:
- A c-commands C, D, and E.
- B does not c-command any nodes.
- C c-commands A.
- D c-commands E.
- E c-commands D.
B
/ \
A C
/ \
D E
Origin of term
"C-command" is generally taken to be a shortened form of "constituent command." According to anonymous sources cited by Andrew Carnie,[4] however, the etymology of "c-command" may also be traced back to a time in the 1970s when the c-command relationship existed alongside another relationship, kommand, proposed by Howard Lasnik in 1976.[5] Since "command" and "kommand" were pronounced the same way, linguists may have differentiated them by referring to them as "c-command" and "k-command," respectively. It is unclear, then, whether the term "c-command" is left over from this former distinction, or "constituent command" was a pre-existing term and "c-command" an abbreviated form of it.
C-command and the first branching node
The above definition specified that the domain of c-command is the first branching node that dominates A. This relationship is sometimes known as strict c-command.[6] Without this specification, c-command would be limited to cases in which the first node of any sort dominating A also dominates B. The following tree illustrates how these two accounts differ in their result. If all nodes are considered, then A does not c-command any other nodes, because B dominates it and does not dominate any other nodes; if only branching nodes are considered, then B is irrelevant in evaluating the third criterion, and A does c-command D, E, and F.
C / \ B D | |\ A E F
References
- ^ See also Howard Lasnik (1975) and Noam Chomsky (1981).
- ^ Haegeman, Liliane (1994). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 147.
- ^ Carnie, Andrew (2002). Syntax: A Generative Introduction (1st ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 75.
- ^ Carnie, Andrew (2002). Syntax: A Generative Introduction (1st ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 77.
- ^ Keshet, Ezra (2004-05-20). "24.952 Syntax Squib". MIT. http://web.mit.edu/ekeshet/www/Papers/phase.pdf.
- ^ Haegeman, Liliane (1994). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 137.
- Harris, C. L. and Bates, E. A. (2002) 'Clausal backgrounding and pronominal reference: A functionalist approach to c-command'. Language and Cognitive Processes 17(3):237-269.
- Contemporary Linguistics by William O'Grady, Michael Dobrovolsky, and Mark Aronoff. Bedford/St. Martin's. 1997 (third edition).
See also
External links
- c-command and pronouns
- Node relations, University of Pennsylvania
- Some Basic Concepts in Government and Binding Theory
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
