COMP-TRACE EFFECT
(Syntax) A constraint on wh-movement. Notice first that long-distance wh-movement of complements and adjuncts is unaffected by whether the complement clause is headed by an overt complementizer or a silent one (indicated in the following examples by ø):

1. [Which friends]_i did they say {that, ø} they saw t_i?
2. [Which way]_i did they say {that, ø} they would fix the leaky faucet t_i?

3. [Which friends]_i did they say ø t_i saw them?
4. *[Which friends]_i did they say that t_i saw them?

COMPARATIVE LINGUISTICS
(Diachronic) Previously known as comparative grammar or comparative philology. Used to study the relationships between two or more languages in order to reveal whether or not the languages have a common ancestor (Britannica n.d.). Comparative linguistics was mostly used during the 19th century in Europe as it was firstly initiated in 1786 by Sir William Jones who discovered that Sanskrit was related to Latin, German, and Greek.
 Robins (1975) wrote that comparative linguistics has a very important role in contributing to the understanding of the nature of how language works and the development (change) of languages in the world. In this regard, the main task of comparative linguistics is to analyze and provide an explanation of the nature of language change. In general, the nature of language (1) has a structure (synchronic dimension) and (2) is always changing (diachronic dimension). | Wulan Yulianita, Yasa Nur Malina Ruminda, 2023

COMPLEMENT

1. (Syntax) Phrases expanding notions inherent in the predicate are considered to be complements. (Gibson, 1973, p. 66) Phrases which are expansions of the inflectional person categories of the predicate are also complements. In Secwepmctsín, phrases and clauses which complete predicative notions occur as complements introduced by 'ʔes'.
    Complements can be differentiated according to the following properties:
   1. A subjective complement immediately precedes or follows the predicate.
   2. An objective complement follows the predicate, and occurs after the subject if it also follows the predicate.
    (Gibson 1973) | INLP Linguistic Glossary
2. (Syntax) YP in [_H' H YP], where H is a head and H' the projection of H. According to X-bar theory, the complement of a head X⁰ is defined either as a position attached or adjoined to X', or as a sister of X⁰. Thus, in configuration (1), either A and B are complements of X⁰, or just B (the sister of X⁰).

   1.       X'
           / \
          /   \     
         A     X'
              / \
             /   \	
            B     X0
      

    Sometimes, the complement of a head X⁰ is equated with its internal argument(s). Chomsky 1981, 1986; Williams 1980) | Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics, 2001
3. (Grammar) In many modern grammars (for instance in those that build on the X-bar schema), the object argument of a verbal predicate is called a "complement". In fact, this use of the term is the one that currently dominates in linguistics. A main aspect of this understanding of complements is that the subject is usually not a complement of the predicate, e.g.:
   1. He wiped the counter.
      The NP the counter is the object complement of the verb wiped.
   2. She scoured the tub.
      The NP the tub is the object complement of the verb scoured.
    The NPs the counter and the tub are necessary to complete the meaning of the verbs wiped and scoured, respectively, hence they are complements. | Wikipedia, 2019

COMPLEMENTARY DISTRIBUTION

1. (General) Two elements a and b are in complementary distribution if a, but not b, occurs in those environments where on general grounds we may expect both a and b, while b, but not a occurs in the complementary set of environments. | Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics, 2001
2. (Phonology) Often taken as an indication that two superficially different elements are one and the same at a deeper level. Two sounds /a/ and /b/ are in complementary distribution when one of the two (/a/) occurs in all environments except those in which /b/ occurs and vice versa.
    Example: In English [p] and [p^h] are in complementary distribution, since [p^h] occurs syllable-initially when it is directly followed by a stressed vowel (cf. pin [p^hin]), whereas in all other positions [p] is found. In Hindi, however, [p] and [p^h] can occur in the same position and are distinctive. | Utrecht Lexicon of Linguistics, 2001
3. (General) Distinct from contrastive distribution and free variation. The relationship between two different elements of the same kind in which one element is found in one set of environments and the other element is found in a non-intersecting (complementary) set of environments.
    The term often indicates that two superficially different elements are the same linguistic unit at a deeper level, though more than two elements can be in complementary distribution with one another. | Wikipedia, 2023

COMPLEMENTIZER

1. (Syntax) A conjunction which marks a complement clause. In English:
   1. I know that he is here.
   2. I refuted the supposition that he is here.
   3. I am doubtful that he is here.
    | SIL Glossary of Linguistic Terms, 2003
2. (Syntax) A functional category (part of speech) that includes those words that can be used to turn a clause into the subject or object of a sentence. For example, the word that may be called a complementizer in English sentences like Mary believes that it is raining. The concept of complementizers is specific to certain modern grammatical theories; in traditional grammar, such words are normally considered conjunctions. The standard abbreviation for complementizer is C.
    The complementizer is often held to be the syntactic head of a full clause, which is therefore often represented by the abbreviation CP (for complementizer phrase). Evidence that the complementizer functions as the head of its clause includes that it is commonly the last element in a clause in head-final languages like Korean or Japanese, in which other heads follow their complements, whereas it appears at the start of a clause in head-initial languages such as English, where heads normally precede their complements (Sells 1995). | Wikipedia, 2022

COMPLETIVE ASPECT

1. (Grammar) Refers to an aspectual form that expresses an action that has been carried out "thoroughly and to completion". The term perfective aspect is very similar in meaning, but it is distinguished from completive by several authors. (Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994) | Glottopedia, 2008
2. (Grammar) Indicates that an action is, has been, or will be definite and complete(d). It implies that the action was definitely accomplished. | H. Schiffman, 2005

COMPLETIVE PHRASAL VERB
(Grammar) E.g., to burn down, to wipe out, to use up, where the particle has a sense of "completion" and does not usually alter the basic meaning of its verb. | Brock Brady, 1991

COMPLEX PRONOUN
(Morphology) For example, in Québec French there are simple pronouns nous 'us', vous 'you plural', elles 'they.F', and eux 'they.M'; and complex pronouns nous-autres 'us', vous-autres 'you', and eux-autres 'them'. | Mireille Tremblay, 2022

COMPLEXITY-BASED ORDERING

1. (Morphology) The Complexity-Based Ordering Hypothesis (CBO) (Hay 2003) posits that cognitive processing restricts affix combinability above and beyond structural restrictions (e.g. inter-nation-al-iz-ation, but *internation-iz-ation-al, despite being interpretable and meeting structural restrictions). Specifically, CBO states that affixes that tend to be parsed during lexical access occur farther from the root (in English) than affixes that do not, because this facilitates lexical access. | Andrea Sims and Jeffrey Parker, 2012
2. (Morphology) Jennifer Hay (2002) proposed a psycholinguistic approach to affix ordering now known as Complexity-Based Ordering (CBO), which claims that affix order is determined by the parsability of the affixes, i.e. more separable affixes can appear only outside of less separable affixes. Hay shows that this principle accounts for why many grammatical affix combinations are unattested. CBO has since been supported by research of derivational affixes (English prefixes, English suffixes and Russian suffixes). | Robert Reynolds, 2013
3. (Morphology) A psycholinguistic model of morphological complexity, according to which an affix which can be easily parsed out in processing should not occur inside an affix which cannot. This model has been called "complexity based ordering". The general claim is that affixes can be approximately ordered along a hierarchy of complexity, with more separable affixes at one end, and less separable affixes at the other end. More separable affixes can attach outside less separable affixes, but not vice-versa. | Jennifer Hay and Ingo Flag, 2004
4. (Morphology) CBO builds on the Parsability Hypothesis (Hay 2001, 2002, 2003). | Stela Manova, 2022

COMPOSITE PROBE

1. (Syntax) In recent approaches to the A' / A-distinction and how it is related to features (rather than structural positions alone), the call for composite probes grew stronger. Composite probes, as van Urk (2015) labels them, are two probes located on a single head, forming a probe conglomerate—an assumption that has been made for TMA-features on T or Infl already for a while (e.g., the combination of tense and φ-features on a single head). | Magdalena Lohninger, Iva Kovač, and Susanne Wurmbrand, 2022
2. (Syntax) Person and number are sometimes forced to probe in unison. Person and number can form a composite probe, and select a target together (Coon and Bale, 2014).
    If two features on the same head can form a composite probe, we might find a composite probe made up of φ-features and A'-features: [Wh, φ] (a composite A / Ā probe). | Coppe van Urk, 2015
3. (Syntax) The phenomenon where two (or more) features present on the same head probe together in unison, searching for the closest goal bearing both of the features involved in the probe, and ignoring goals with only one or the other of the features (Chomsky 2001, Bruening 2001, Pesetsky and Torrego 2001, Haegeman 2012, Rezac 2013, Coon and Bale 2014, Kotek 2014, Deal 2014). | Nicholas Longenbaugh, 2017

COMPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS

1. (Semantics) Usually defined as a functional dependence of the meaning of an expression on the meanings of its parts. | Wlodek Zadrozny, 1995
2. (Semantics) The building up of phrasal or sentence meaning from the meaning of smaller units by means of semantic rules. To account for speakers' knowledge of the truth, reference, entailment, and ambiguity of sentences, as well as for our ability to determine the meaning of a limitless number of expressions, we must suppose that the grammar contains semantic rules that combine the meanings of words into meaningful phrases and sentences. In other words, semantic rules are principles for determining the meaning of larger units like sentences from the meaning of smaller units like noun phrases and verb phrases.
    Our semantic rules must be sensitive not only to the meaning of individual words but to the structure in which they occur. Two rules:
   1. The meaning of [ S NP VP ] is the following truth condition:
      If the meaning of NP (an individual) is a member of the meaning of VP (a set of individuals), then S is true. Otherwise it is false.
   2. The meaning of [ VP V NP ] is the set of individuals X such that X is the first member of any pair in the meaning of V whose second member is the meaning of NP.
    These two semantic rules handle an essentially infinite number of intransitive and transitive sentences, and they account for our knowledge of the truth value of sentences by taking the meanings of words and combining them according to the syntactic structure of the sentence. | Hatice Eroğlu, 2012

COMPOSITIONALITY
(Semantics) A symbolic system is compositional if the meaning of every complex expression E in that system depends on, and depends only on

1. E's syntactic structure, and
2. The meanings of E's simple parts.

• Things said earlier in the conversation.
• The beliefs or intentions of the person uttering S.
• Salient objects and events in the environment at the time that S is uttered.
• The non-semantic character of S's simple parts, such as their shape or sound.

COMPOUND

1. (Morphology) Most Chinese words are compound words, composed of two or more constituent morphemes.
    Morphemes used as constituents in compounds are usually words by themselves, although there are also bound morphemes in the language. | Xiaolin Zhou, William Marslen-Wilson, Marcus Taft, and Hua Shu, 1999
2. (Morphology) Compounding consists of the combination of two or more lexemes, whereas derivation is characterized by the addition of an affix, that is, a bound morpheme, to a lexeme.
    Compounding is accounted for by a set of Word Structure Rules which form part of syntax and combine lexical stems into compounds.
    Compounds have an internal structure that is accessible to other rules of grammar. For instance, there are rules for introducing linking elements into German compounds that must have access to the internal structure of such complex words (Anderson 1992).
    There is no sharp boundary between compounding and affixal derivation, since there are many borderline cases. | Geert Booij, 2005
3. (Morphology)  Compounding, prima facie, presents a seemingly paradigm case of morphology-as-syntax. It is productive, and it manipulates items which are canonically themselves free morphemes and clearly independent terminal nodes. As shown by Lieber 1992, nominal compounding in English and other Germanic languages can even include syntactically complex phrases, as in the following four examples from Tucson Weekly film reviews by James DiGiovanna:
   1. a. These aren't your standard stuff-blowing-up effects. (06/03/2004)
      b. When he's not in that mode, though, he does an excellent job with the bikini-girls-in-trouble genre. (11/30/2006)
      c. I've always found it odd that the people who complain most about realism are comic-book and science-fiction fans. (12/23/2004)
      d. There's the aforementioned bestiality and drooling-stroke-victim jokes. (03/29/2001)
    | Heidi Harley, 2011

COMPOUND PAST
(Grammar) A term used for the Spanish verb tense Preterito Perfecto Compuesto. The English equivalent is normally the Present Perfect, but I prefer the term Compound Past when dealing with this Spanish verb tense. There are two reasons for this:

1. It maintains a certain logic with another verb tense that is of interest here, namely the Simple Past.
2. Since it has been argued that time of speech is less crucial for the choice of the compound or the simple past form in several dialects (see De Mello 1994, Rodríguez Louro 2009), there is no reason to keep "Present" in the term used.

Page Last Modified February 18, 2024

 

B a c k   T o   I n d e x