postnominal adjectives in English

Nerbonne J. nerbonne at let.rug.nl
Mon Jan 28 04:59:27 EST 2002


I think a locus classicus for this distinction is Muffy Siegel's UMass
Diss. (1976).   She relates the distinction to Russian long- and
short form adjectives  (xolodnoj / xoloden), and especially to
inherent vs. temporary properties of objects.  This ends up being
explained as the distinction between a set of objects (type <e,t>
in Montague Grammar) and a mapping from common nouns to
common nouns (type <<s, <e,t>>, <s, <e,t>>>).

       Capturing the adjective / Muffy E. A. Siegel
       New York, N.Y., Garland (Outstanding dissertations
       in linguistics) 1980 .

I'd bet there are copies at OSU.

John Nerbonne

On Monday 28 January 2002 04:16, Wesley Davidson wrote:
> Can anyone point me to any discussion or analysis (hpsg-based or
> otherwise) of contrasts like the following?  (...the contrast being that
> some modifying adjPs are okay postnominally, but not others).
>
> 1a)   We invited all the firemen available.
>  b) ??We invited all the firemen friendly.
>
> 2a)   They drove to the nearest store open.
>  b) ??They drove to the nearest store cheap.
>
> 3a)   The only towel clean was sitting on a shelf 6 feet above the sink.
>  b) ??The only towel green was sitting on a shelf 6 feet above the sink.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Wesley Davidson

--
John Nerbonne, Alfa-informatica
nerbonne at let.rug.nl
+31 50 363 58 15



More information about the HPSG-L mailing list